From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [PATCH] [e1000]: Remove unnecessary tx_lock Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 06:45:26 -0400 Message-ID: <1154688326.5187.53.camel@jzny2> References: <1154628302.3117.15.camel@rh4> <1154642918.5187.13.camel@jzny2> <1154650197.3117.32.camel@rh4> <20060804011027.GC12085@gondor.apana.org.au> <20060804083734.GA16082@gondor.apana.org.au> <20060804101017.GA17393@gondor.apana.org.au> <1154686563.5187.43.camel@jzny2> <20060804102557.GA17723@gondor.apana.org.au> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Michael Chan , "Brandeburg, Jesse" , auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mx02.cybersurf.com ([209.197.145.105]:65214 "EHLO mx02.cybersurf.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161146AbWHDKpb (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Aug 2006 06:45:31 -0400 Received: from mail.cyberus.ca ([209.197.145.21]) by mx02.cybersurf.com with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1G8xBM-000827-MM for netdev@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 04 Aug 2006 06:45:32 -0400 To: Herbert Xu In-Reply-To: <20060804102557.GA17723@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2006-04-08 at 20:25 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > Well it's not that good since the current code only takes the > lock in exceptional circumstances while my patch does the atomic > op unconditionally. yes, it would be nice to fix that. However, from a selfish angle, my worries are more about the overload case ;-> logically it is more likely you have a lot less CPU resources when overloaded than in the common case; actually now i have said "common" 100 times i understand Jesse better ;->. > But then again the current code is wrong :) indeed. cheers, jamal