From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evgeniy Polyakov Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tcp: splice as many packets as possible at once Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 16:06:06 +0300 Message-ID: <20090203130606.GA25471@ioremap.net> References: <20090202080855.GA4129@ff.dom.local> <20090202.001854.261399333.davem@davemloft.net> <20090202084358.GB4129@ff.dom.local> <20090202.235017.253437221.davem@davemloft.net> <20090203094108.GA4639@ff.dom.local> <20090203111012.GA16878@ioremap.net> <20090203123628.GB4639@ff.dom.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, w@1wt.eu, dada1@cosmosbay.com, ben@zeus.com, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com To: Jarek Poplawski Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090203123628.GB4639@ff.dom.local> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 12:36:28PM +0000, Jarek Poplawski (jarkao2@gmail.com) wrote: > I understand NTA could be better than slabs in above-mentioned cases, > but I'm not sure you explaind enough your point on solving this > zero-copy problem vs. NTA? NTA steals pages from the SLAB so we can maintain any reference counter logic in them, so linear part of the skb may be not really freed/reused until reference counter hits zero. -- Evgeniy Polyakov