lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20100502215450.GC2673@gargoyle.fritz.box> Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 23:54:50 +0200 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hadi@...erus.ca, xiaosuo@...il.com, therbert@...gle.com, shemminger@...tta.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org, arjan@...radead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] net: batch skb dequeueing from softnet input_pkt_queue On Sun, May 02, 2010 at 11:45:55PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Le dimanche 02 mai 2010 à 23:25 +0200, Andi Kleen a écrit : > > > It's pointless to send an IPI to your thread sibling for this. > > Everything it could do you can do yourself too with the same performance. > > > > -Andi > > Amen That is in terms of cache locality. > > Tests just prove the reverse. What do you mean? > > I have some collegues that disable HyperThreading for exact same > reasons. I wonder why Intel designed HT. Should be marketing I guess. HT (especially Nehalem HT) is useful for a wide range of workloads. Just handling network interrupts for its thread sibling is not one of them. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists