[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1454522077.7627.264.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 09:54:37 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc: Hans Westgaard Ry <hans.westgaard.ry@...cle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Kodanev <alexey.kodanev@...cle.com>,
Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net:Add sysctl_max_skb_frags
On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 09:43 -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> Read the history. I still say it is best if we don't accept a partial
> solution. If we are going to introduce the sysctl as a core item it
> should function as a core item and not as something that belongs to
> TCP only.
But this patch is the base, adding both the core sysctl and its first
usage.
Do we really need to split it in 2 patches ? Really ?
The goal is to use it in all skb providers were it might be a
performance gain, once they are identified.
Your points were already raised and will be addressed, by either me or
you. And maybe others.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists