From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (New Benchmarks)
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 09:26:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A59EA1F.AEAD08A6@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3A578F27.D2A9DF52@candelatech.com> <20010107042959.A14330@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <3A580B31.7998C783@candelatech.com> <20010107062744.A15198@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <3A58249F.86DD52BC@candelatech.com> <3A597665.4B68C39@candelatech.com> <200101080700.XAA10037@pizda.ninka.net>
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 01:12:21 -0700
> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
>
> http://grok.yi.org/~greear/hashed_dev.png
> (If you can't get to it, let me know and I'll email it to you...some
> cable modem networks have I firewalled.)
>
> It just seems that this shows that the implementation of ifconfig can
> be improved, since "ip" can do the same thing several orders of
> magnitude better (ie. non-quadratic system time complexity).
>
> This is the argument I started with when this thread began, so my
> position hasn't changed, it has in fact been well supported by your
> tests :-)
I don't argue that ifconfig shouldn't be fixed, but the hash speeds up
ip by about 2X too. Is that not useful enough? ip seems to be implemented
pretty efficient, so if the hash helps it significantly then maybe it
can help other efficient programs too. Notice that it is the system
(ie kernel) time that stays remarkably flat with the hash + ip graph.
Ben
--
Ben Greear (greearb@candelatech.com) http://www.candelatech.com
Author of ScryMUD: scry.wanfear.com 4444 (Released under GPL)
http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-01-08 15:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-01-06 21:33 [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) Ben Greear
2001-01-06 23:17 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 4:06 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 5:36 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 13:42 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission Alan Cox
2001-01-07 15:33 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-07 16:46 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-07 17:32 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-07 19:02 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:06 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-07 18:53 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-07 19:30 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:30 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-07 22:40 ` 5116
2001-01-08 2:19 ` David Ford
2001-01-09 20:25 ` Christopher E. Brown
2001-01-10 2:47 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:21 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:00 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-07 19:10 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:24 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-08 0:21 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:37 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:53 ` jamal
2001-01-07 3:29 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) Chris Wedgwood
2001-01-07 5:40 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 6:15 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 10:22 ` David Ford
2001-01-07 12:13 ` Chris Wedgwood
2001-01-07 12:01 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-08 5:32 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-08 6:12 ` Chris Wedgwood
2001-01-08 6:26 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-08 6:57 ` David Ford
2001-01-08 13:08 ` jamal
2001-01-09 13:28 ` Blu3Viper
2001-01-08 6:13 ` Blu3Viper
2001-01-07 12:19 ` David Ford
2001-01-07 16:56 ` jamal
2001-01-07 17:37 ` Gleb Natapov
2001-01-07 18:02 ` routable interfaces WAS( " jamal
2001-01-07 19:21 ` routable interfaces WAS( Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (DoesNOT " Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:29 ` jamal
2001-01-07 18:51 ` Gleb Natapov
2001-01-07 19:05 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:19 ` routable interfaces WAS( Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup(DoesNOT " Sandy Harris
2001-01-07 20:42 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-08 0:37 ` jamal
2001-01-08 5:25 ` routable interfaces WAS( Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup(DoesNOTmeet " Ben Greear
2001-01-08 13:05 ` jamal
2001-01-07 3:29 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet " Andi Kleen
2001-01-07 4:00 ` jamal
2001-01-07 4:06 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-07 5:43 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 11:40 ` [little bit OT] ip _IS_ _NOT_ ifconfig and route ! (was Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)) Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-01-07 11:50 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 13:47 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission Alan Cox
2001-01-07 16:12 ` jamal
2001-01-07 16:51 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-07 15:56 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) jamal
2001-01-07 16:30 ` Gleb Natapov
2001-01-07 16:36 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:54 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumissionpolicy!) Ben Greear
2001-01-07 6:24 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 5:29 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-07 6:22 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) Ben Greear
2001-01-07 5:27 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-07 8:11 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) (Benchmarks) Ben Greear
2001-01-07 7:15 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-08 8:12 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (New Benchmarks) Ben Greear
2001-01-08 7:00 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-08 16:26 ` Ben Greear [this message]
2001-01-08 16:50 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-09 16:27 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 13:50 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission Alan Cox
2001-01-07 16:44 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2001-01-07 19:09 ` Ben Greear
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3A59EA1F.AEAD08A6@candelatech.com \
--to=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox