On Tue, 2008-22-01 at 13:29 +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 06:42:07AM -0500, jamal wrote: > ... > > Jarek, > > > > That looks different from the suggestion from Dave. > > Hmm..., I'm not sure you mean my or your suggestion here, but you > are right anyway...
Your idea to grab a pointer to the estimator so you can quickly find it upon destruction is a good one. The challenge was not to break the ABI to user space. Dave suggested to use a different struct for the kernel side and maintain the user one as is[1]. Your patch didnt do this, hence my statement;-> > Maybe I miss something, but there still could be a lot of this walking Indeed, that is possible in the case of many estimators configured with the same interval - because they will all fall in the same table bucket and the idx is not that useful to begin with. I was wrong given the nature of interval - the majority of the users will have an estimator interval of say 1 sec which will put everything in one bucket still. We could introduce a proper index that will allow proper distribution and have that stored by the class. I am not sure i made sense. But you are coding - and your idea sounds better. cheers, jamal [1] This is _not uncommon_ (note the usage of double negation here for emphasis;->) technique actually; ones that go further for example can be found all over the net/sched code (struct tcf_police vs tc_police) etc. -- 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
