From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: add a comment on netdev->last_rx Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:37:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100831.133727.235702469.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1283276416.2550.140.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, joe@perches.com To: eric.dumazet@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:39915 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754603Ab0HaUhL (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:37:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1283276416.2550.140.camel@edumazet-laptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Eric Dumazet Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 19:40:16 +0200 > As some driver authors seem to reintroduce dev->last_rx use, > add a comment to strongly discourage this. > > Since commit 6cf3f41e6c0 (bonding, net: Move last_rx update into bonding > recv logic), network drivers dont need to update last_rx themselves, > unless they use this field to implement a timeout. > > Not updating last_rx helps not dirtying a cache line, improving > performance in SMP. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet Applied.