From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Network performance degradation from 2.6.11.12 to 2.6.16.20 Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 07:55:03 +0200 Message-ID: <200609190755.03713.ak@suse.de> References: <20060918162847.GA4863@ms2.inr.ac.ru> <20060918210321.GA4780@ms2.inr.ac.ru> <20060918.142247.14844785.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, master@sectorb.msk.ru, hawk@diku.dk, harry@atmos.washington.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:54949 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751162AbWISFzu (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2006 01:55:50 -0400 To: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20060918.142247.14844785.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Monday 18 September 2006 23:22, David Miller wrote: > Ok, ok, but don't we have queueing disciplines that need the timestamp > even on ingress? I grepped and I can't find any. The only non SIOCGTSTAMP users of the time stamp seem to be sunrpc and conntrack and I bet both can be converted over to jiffies without trouble. -Andi