From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx()
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:12:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080331101237.GA12324@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47F0B66C.6080404@cosmosbay.com>
* Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> wrote:
> Problem is to check available space :
>
> It depends on stack growing UP or DOWN, and depends on caller running
> on process stack, or softirq stack, or even hardirq stack.
ok - i wish such threads were on lkml so that everyone not just the
netdev kabal can read it. It's quite ugly, but if we want to check stack
free space i'd suggest for you to put a stack_can_recurse() call into
arch/x86/kernel/process.c and offer a default __weak implementation in
kernel/fork.c that always returns 0.
the rule on x86 should be something like this: on 4K stacks and 64-bit
[which have irqstacks] free stack space can go as low as 25%. On 8K
stacks [which doesnt have irqstacks but nests irqs] it should not go
below 50% before falling back to the explicitly queued packet branch.
this way other pieces of kernel code code can choose between on-stack
fast recursion and explicit iterators. Although i'm not sure i like the
whole concept to begin with ...
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-31 10:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-21 18:51 [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx() Eric Dumazet
2008-02-21 20:14 ` Daniel Lezcano
2008-02-21 23:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-02-22 10:19 ` Daniel Lezcano
2008-02-27 2:21 ` David Miller
2008-02-27 7:20 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-02-27 7:23 ` David Miller
2008-02-27 7:34 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-03-01 10:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-04 4:55 ` David Miller
2008-03-04 5:15 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-03-04 6:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-23 10:29 ` David Miller
2008-03-23 18:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-23 19:15 ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-29 1:36 ` David Miller
2008-03-29 8:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-29 23:54 ` David Miller
2008-03-31 6:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-31 9:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-31 10:01 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-31 10:12 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-04-01 9:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-04-03 14:06 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-03 16:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-31 10:08 ` David Miller
2008-03-31 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-31 11:02 ` David Miller
2008-03-31 11:36 ` poor network loopback performance and scalability (was: Re: [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx()) Ingo Molnar
2008-04-21 3:24 ` Herbert Xu
2008-04-21 3:38 ` poor network loopback performance and scalability David Miller
2008-04-21 8:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-21 8:16 ` David Miller
2008-04-21 10:19 ` Herbert Xu
2008-04-21 10:22 ` David Miller
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=20080331101237.GA12324@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).