From: Peter Oskolkov
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 11:10:55 -0800
> Thanks, Stephen!
>
> I don't care much about braces either. David, do you want me to send a
> new patch with braces moved around?
Single statement basic blocks definitely must not have curly braces,
please remove them and repost.
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:11 AM Peter Oskolkov wrote:
>
> Thanks, Stephen!
>
> I don't care much about braces either. David, do you want me to send a
> new patch with braces moved around?
Sent a v2 with style fixes, just in case.
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 9:56 AM Stephen Hemminger
> wrote:
>
Thanks, Stephen!
I don't care much about braces either. David, do you want me to send a
new patch with braces moved around?
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 9:56 AM Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
>
> I like this, it makes a lot of sense since packets are almost
> always queued in order.
>
> Minor style stuff
I like this, it makes a lot of sense since packets are almost
always queued in order.
Minor style stuff you might want to fix (but don't have to).
> + if (!last ||
> + t_last->time_to_send > last->time_to_send) {
> +
On 12/03/2018 05:07 PM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> When testing high-bandwidth TCP streams with large windows,
> high latency, and low jitter, netem consumes a lot of CPU cycles
> doing rbtree rebalancing.
>
> This patch uses a linear list/queue in addition to the rbtree:
> if an incoming packet
When testing high-bandwidth TCP streams with large windows,
high latency, and low jitter, netem consumes a lot of CPU cycles
doing rbtree rebalancing.
This patch uses a linear list/queue in addition to the rbtree:
if an incoming packet is past the tail of the linear queue, it is
added there,
