From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com (e2.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.142]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e2.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B209867BFF for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 23:47:52 +1000 (EST) Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k7IDln1f004397 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:47:49 -0400 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/NCO v8.1.1) with ESMTP id k7IDlm3K290228 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:47:48 -0400 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k7IDlmFp002972 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:47:48 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [2.6.19 PATCH 3/7] ehea: queue management Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 15:47:46 +0200 References: <200608181331.19501.ossthema@de.ibm.com> <1155903451.4494.168.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <44E5BFB7.4000400@de.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <44E5BFB7.4000400@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200608181547.47081.arnd.bergmann@de.ibm.com> Cc: Thomas Klein , Jan-Bernd Themann , netdev , linux-kernel , Thomas Klein , Christoph Raisch , Marcus Eder , Arjan van de Ven List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Friday 18 August 2006 15:25, Thomas Klein wrote: > > > wow... is this really so large that it warrants a vmalloc()??? > > Agreed: Replaced with kmalloc() My understanding from the previous discussion was that it actually is a multi-page power of two allocation, so the right choice might be __get_free_pages() instead of kmalloc, but it probably doesn't make much of a difference. You should really do some measurements to see what the minimal queue sizes are that can get you optimal throughput. Arnd <>< From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030298AbWHRNrx (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:47:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030227AbWHRNrv (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:47:51 -0400 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.144]:10198 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751388AbWHRNru (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:47:50 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann Organization: IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [2.6.19 PATCH 3/7] ehea: queue management Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 15:47:46 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: Thomas Klein , Arjan van de Ven , Thomas Klein , Jan-Bernd Themann , netdev , linux-kernel , Christoph Raisch , Marcus Eder References: <200608181331.19501.ossthema@de.ibm.com> <1155903451.4494.168.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <44E5BFB7.4000400@de.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <44E5BFB7.4000400@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200608181547.47081.arnd.bergmann@de.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 18 August 2006 15:25, Thomas Klein wrote: > > > wow... is this really so large that it warrants a vmalloc()??? > > Agreed: Replaced with kmalloc() My understanding from the previous discussion was that it actually is a multi-page power of two allocation, so the right choice might be __get_free_pages() instead of kmalloc, but it probably doesn't make much of a difference. You should really do some measurements to see what the minimal queue sizes are that can get you optimal throughput. Arnd <><