netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: baruch@ev-en.org, shemminger@osdl.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: netif_rx packet dumping
Date: 8 Mar 2005 19:18:44 +0100
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 19:18:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050308181844.GA37392@muc.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050308100902.24b67b2f.davem@davemloft.net>

> > You could also use a xor list in theory. But I'm not sure it's worth it.
> > Increasing cb by 4 bytes shouldn't be a very big issue.
> 
> Going from "40" to "44" takes 64-bit platforms onto another cache line
> for struct sk_buff, as I stated in another email.
> 
> And every time I let this happen, I get an email from David Mosberger because
> it shows up in performance tests on ia64. :-)

Ok, then use a XOR list or trim some other field.

There are some other savings possible e.g. from a quick look:
- skb->list is afaik totally unnecessary and probably even unused.
- struct timeval could be an optimized structure using 32bit
for the sub second part. 
(would need moving it somewhere else, otherwise alignment doesn't help)
- Are really three device pointers needed? Perhaps things can
be a bit optimized here.
- Hippi could be finally changed to use skb->cb instead of its
private field.
- is skb->security still needed? It should be obsolete with ->sec_path, no?
Would only help together with the timestamp optimization.

Of course these all wouldn't change the number of cache lines significantly,
but it would possible allow other optimizations that need new fields.

-Andi

  reply	other threads:[~2005-03-08 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-03-03 20:38 netif_rx packet dumping Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-03 20:55 ` David S. Miller
2005-03-03 21:01   ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-03 21:18   ` jamal
2005-03-03 21:21     ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-03 21:24       ` jamal
2005-03-03 21:32         ` David S. Miller
2005-03-03 21:54           ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-03 22:02             ` John Heffner
2005-03-03 22:26               ` jamal
2005-03-03 23:16                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-03 23:40                   ` jamal
2005-03-03 23:48                   ` Baruch Even
2005-03-04  3:45                     ` jamal
2005-03-04  8:47                       ` Baruch Even
2005-03-07 13:55                         ` jamal
2005-03-08 15:56                           ` Baruch Even
2005-03-08 22:02                             ` jamal
2005-03-22 21:55                             ` cliff white
2005-03-03 23:48                   ` John Heffner
2005-03-04  1:42                     ` Lennert Buytenhek
2005-03-04  3:10                       ` John Heffner
2005-03-04  3:31                         ` Lennert Buytenhek
2005-03-04 19:52                 ` Edgar E Iglesias
2005-03-04 19:54                   ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-04 21:41                     ` Edgar E Iglesias
2005-03-04 19:49             ` Jason Lunz
2005-03-03 22:01           ` jamal
2005-03-03 21:26 ` Baruch Even
2005-03-03 21:36   ` David S. Miller
2005-03-03 21:44     ` Baruch Even
2005-03-03 21:54       ` Andi Kleen
2005-03-03 22:04         ` David S. Miller
2005-03-03 21:57       ` David S. Miller
2005-03-03 22:14         ` Baruch Even
2005-03-08 15:42         ` Baruch Even
2005-03-08 17:00           ` Andi Kleen
2005-03-08 18:01             ` Baruch Even
2005-03-08 18:09             ` David S. Miller
2005-03-08 18:18               ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-03-08 18:37                 ` Thomas Graf
2005-03-08 18:51                   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2005-03-08 22:16                   ` Andi Kleen
2005-03-08 18:27               ` Ben Greear
2005-03-09 23:57                 ` Thomas Graf
2005-03-10  0:03                   ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-10  8:33                   ` Andi Kleen
2005-03-10 14:08                     ` Thomas Graf
2005-03-31 16:33         ` Baruch Even
2005-03-03 22:03   ` jamal
2005-03-03 22:31     ` Baruch Even

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=20050308181844.GA37392@muc.de \
    --to=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=baruch@ev-en.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=shemminger@osdl.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).