Compile tested only!!!
Fix optimization of netdev_priv() lost by the addition of multiqueue.
Move the variable size subqueues to after the constant size priv area.
When putting back the old netdev_priv() code, I tried to make it
clearer by using roundup() and ALIGN() macros.
--- a/include/linux
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:40:22 -0700
> Compile tested only!!!
Obviously. The first loopback transmit is guarenteed to crash.
> Fix optimization of netdev_priv() lost by the addition of multiqueue.
> Move the variable size subqueues to after the cons
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:40:22 -0700
>
> > Compile tested only!!!
>
> Obviously. The first loopback transmit is guarenteed to crash.
That is fixable.
> > Fix optim
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:19:28 -0700
> The subqueue is only referenced in start/stop queue and that only happens
> once per packet on normal tx, and only if multiqueue is used.
If it only happens when multiqueue, then why does loopback need
at least on
Fix optimization of netdev_priv() lost by the addition of multiqueue.
Only configurations that define MULITQUEUE need the extra overhead in
netdevice structure and the loss of the netdev_priv optimization.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- a/include/linux/netdevice.h 2007
Hi,
David Miller wrote:
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:40:22 -0700
Compile tested only!!!
Obviously. The first loopback transmit is guarenteed to crash.
[...]
And this also breaks loopback again, which uses a static struct netdev
in the kernel image,
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:49:09 -0700
> Fix optimization of netdev_priv() lost by the addition of multiqueue.
>
> Only configurations that define MULITQUEUE need the extra overhead in
> netdevice structure and the loss of the netdev_priv optimization.
>
David Miller wrote:
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:49:09 -0700
Fix optimization of netdev_priv() lost by the addition of multiqueue.
Only configurations that define MULITQUEUE need the extra overhead in
netdevice structure and the loss of the netdev_priv
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:21:25 -0700
"Kok, Auke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:49:09 -0700
> >
> >> Fix optimization of netdev_priv() lost by the addition of multiqueue.
> >>
> >> Only configurations th
From: "Kok, Auke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:21:25 -0700
> this sounds highly optimistic ("64 queues is enough for everyone"?)
> and probably will be quickly outdated by both hardware and demand...
As such drivers appear in the tree we can adjust the value.
Even the most aggre
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:28:07 -0700
> Plan C was replacing MULTIQUEUE boolean with a int value 1 ... 256.
> All this was a one day "what if" exercise, not really a big churn..
Yes, that's another reasonable approach.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: s
David Miller wrote:
From: "Kok, Auke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:21:25 -0700
this sounds highly optimistic ("64 queues is enough for everyone"?)
and probably will be quickly outdated by both hardware and demand...
As such drivers appear in the tree we can adjust the value.
12 matches
Mail list logo
