From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ravikiran G Thirumalai Subject: Re: [patch 7/11] net: Use bigrefs for net_device.refcount Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 15:16:32 -0700 Message-ID: <20050913221632.GB6249@localhost.localdomain> References: <20050913155112.GB3570@localhost.localdomain> <20050913161012.GI3570@localhost.localdomain> <20050913092659.791bddec@localhost.localdomain> <20050913.132607.113443001.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: shemminger@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dipankar@in.ibm.com, bharata@in.ibm.com, shai@scalex86.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: "David S. Miller" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050913.132607.113443001.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 01:26:07PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Stephen Hemminger > Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:26:59 -0700 > > > Since when is bringing a network device up/down performance critical? > > The issue is the dev_get()'s that occur all over the place > to during packet transmit/receive, that's what they are > trying to address. > > I'm still against all of these invasive NUMA changes to the > networking though, they are simply too ugly and special cased > to consider seriously. All of them or the dst ones? Hopefully the netdevice refcounter patch is not ugly or complicated as the dst ones? And why are they special cased? Are networking workloads with high route locality not interesting? Thanks, Kiran