From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:16:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20050622.141626.03111803.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20050622180654.GX14251@wotan.suse.de>
	<20050622.132241.21929037.davem@davemloft.net>
	<20050622211058.GY14251@wotan.suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: leonid.grossman@neterion.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, becker@scyld.com,
        rick.jones2@hp.com, netdev@oss.sgi.com, davem@redhat.com
Return-path: <netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com>
To: ak@suse.de
In-Reply-To: <20050622211058.GY14251@wotan.suse.de>
Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 23:10:58 +0200

> 8 entries? That sounds very small. Is that an old Sparc or something? :)

Hey, Sparc does suck, this isn't news for anyone :-)

> Looks reasonable. Not sure about the "most optimal" though, some benchmarking
> of different schemes would be probably a good idea.

Absolutely.