[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikeECFUf0xiug7G+nd5=Sw7p=4Msz6RQ2gdOBzs@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 22:50:03 +0800
From: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
To: hadi@...erus.ca
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ifb: move tq from ifb_private
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 10:42 PM, jamal <hadi@...erus.ca> wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 09:18 -0500, jamal wrote:
>
>> I like the splice idea but this patch makes me twitch
>> a little. What test setup did you use to check it?
>
> Ok, here's one thing you changed which is important. We do:
>
> -->XXX-->rq-->tq-->XXX-->
>
> rq is controlled by queue limit.
> We only load rq to tq if all of tq is empty. If it is not
> we dont move things over. Essentially this is a flow
> control scheme. We dont want many sources to be overwhelming
> us with packets and every time we grab a txqlen number of packets.
> For this reason:
> I would be comfortable if all you did was to add the splice
> after you skb_peek() - i think that would be a good improvement
> which is not bound to break anything else.
>
Maybe you misread my patch. tq is a stack variable in ri_tasklet, and
initialized all the time. ri_tasklet() won't exits until tq is
empty().
--
Regards,
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@...il.com)
--
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