On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 20:38 +0100, Robert Olsson wrote: > jamal writes: > > Robert, what about just #1? Maybe thats the best compromise that would > > work for all. > > I've tried that before with flow test and got contribution from #2 > > 0 prefetch 756 kpps > 1 prefetch 805 kpps (first) > 2 prefetch 821 kpps (first two) > 5 prefetch 803 kpps (all) > > > > Also, I am really hoping that someone will test with older hardware > > where i claim to have seen prefetch causing problems. > > We give this up for now unless you or somebody else has some very good idea > how handle prefetching in generic way. > > I'll use #12 and you'll use #125 Intel uses #12345 etc > > Or do we all benefit from #12? >
I am willing to say lets go with #12, but now more than ever i am more concerned about the older hardware. I think if we cant test older hardware this patch should not go in at all. Or should go in with only ifdefs. cheers, jamal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
