From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH] sky2: skb recycling Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:05:17 -0700 Message-ID: <20081022170517.051d766f@extreme> References: <20081020190922.7dd6510a@extreme> <20081020.221857.209830018.davem@davemloft.net> <48FE34AF.8050508@hp.com> <48FE386F.8090706@cosmosbay.com> <20081021133811.68bd5ce1@extreme> <48FFBE19.7010803@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Eric Dumazet , David Miller , jgarzik@pobox.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Rick Jones Return-path: Received: from mail.vyatta.com ([76.74.103.46]:60325 "EHLO mail.vyatta.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751318AbYJWAFT convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:05:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <48FFBE19.7010803@hp.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:58:17 -0700 Rick Jones wrote: > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 22:15:43 +0200 > > Eric Dumazet wrote: > >=20 > >=20 > >>Rick Jones a =C3=A9crit : > >>> I've not had a good emily litella moment all day so I'll ask - is > >>> there really that much in the way of suitable skb's which are > >>> completely free after transmit completion? > >> > >> Or, if we take another way, say a VOIP RTP machine sends and > >> receive 20.000 packets per second, each being 200 bytes long, are > >> transmited packets correctly sized at sendto() time to be > >> candidates for recycling ? > >=20 > > No. Most locally generate packets aren't going to be right size > > because they will be too small, cloned or fragmented. It really on= ly > > helps when forwarding. >=20 > So we have a bit of "tension" between the desires of an end host vs=20 > those of a router right? >=20 > rick jones Not tension, just means on end host this optimization does nothing.