From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AD3A1A03D3 for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 23:52:09 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 08:51:52 -0400 From: Sowmini Varadhan To: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 RFC 0/3] Generic IOMMU pooled allocator Message-ID: <20150402125152.GA17528@oracle.com> References: <20150331180642.GA13314@oracle.com> <1427850091.20500.150.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <551B4502.1020603@oracle.com> <20150331.231224.402909066860518278.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20150331.231224.402909066860518278.davem@davemloft.net> Cc: aik@au1.ibm.com, anton@au1.ibm.com, paulus@samba.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On (03/31/15 23:12), David Miller wrote: > > It's much more amortized with smart buffering strategies, which are > common on current generation networking cards. > > There you only eat one map/unmap per "PAGE_SIZE / rx_pkt_size". > > Maybe the infiniband stuff is doing things very suboptimally, and > actually with that subsystem and drivers absolutely nothing would > surprise me. yeh, we are trying to get more info from them about what their bottle-necks are. Until then, lets just stick with the spin_lock. do I need to resubmit this without the RFC tag? Perhaps I should have dropped that some time ago. --Sowmini