[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E0CBCE7.4060403@candelatech.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:13:59 -0700
From: Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, kaber@...sh.net, fubar@...ibm.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com,
andy@...yhouse.net
Subject: Re: [RFC patch net-next-2.6] net: allow multiple rx_handler registration
On 06/30/2011 08:16 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> For some net topos it is necessary to have multiple "soft-net-devices"
> hooked on one netdev. For example very common is to have
> eth<->(br+vlan). Vlan is not using rh_handler (yet) but also for example
> macvlan would be useful to have hooked on same netdev as br.
>
> This patch introduces rx_handler list. size struct net_device stays
> intact. Measured performance regression on eth-br topo is ~1% (on received
> pkts generated by pktgen) and on eth-bond topo it is ~0.25%
>
> On br I think that the performance can be brought back maybe by using per-cpu
> variables to store port in rx_path (I must check this)
> +enum rx_handler_prio {
> + RX_HANDLER_PRIO_BRIDGE,
> + RX_HANDLER_PRIO_BOND,
> + RX_HANDLER_PRIO_MACVLAN,
> +};
Maybe add RX_HANDLER_PRIO_LATER, RX_HANDLER_PRIO_FIRST
for other modules that want to link
here, but don't have specific ordering other than before
or after these specific types?
Or maybe start PRIO_BRIDGE at 100, BOND 110, MACVLAN 120
to leave gaps.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.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