[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170318164759.GA23837@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 00:47:59 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: elena.reshetova@...el.com, davem@...emloft.net,
keescook@...omium.org, peterz@...radead.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru,
jmorris@...ei.org, kaber@...sh.net, stephen@...workplumber.org,
ishkamiel@...il.com, dwindsor@...il.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/17] net: convert sock.sk_refcnt from atomic_t to
refcount_t
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-03-17 at 07:42 +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
>
>> Should we then first measure the actual numbers to understand what we
>> are talking here about?
>> I would be glad to do it if you suggest what is the correct way to do
>> measurements here to actually reflect the real life use cases.
>
> How have these patches been tested in real life exactly ?
>
> Can you quantify number of added cycles per TCP packet, where I expect
> we have maybe 20 atomic operations in all layers ...
I completely agree. I think this thing needs to default to the
existing atomic_t behaviour.
Thanks,
--
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Powered by blists - more mailing lists