From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Greear Subject: Re: reminder, 2.6.18 window... Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 00:18:31 -0700 Message-ID: <44755A47.3030405@candelatech.com> References: <20060523.182217.59656237.davem@davemloft.net> <447412CA.50303@ipom.com> <4474A489.4080308@garzik.org> <20060524185644.GF22881@ipom.com> <4474AE92.3030501@garzik.org> <20060524191442.GG22881@ipom.com> <1148501433.5325.52.camel@jzny2> <20060524204800.GH22881@ipom.com> <4474CA66.5020401@hp.com> <4474CBAA.4040307@candelatech.com> <44753A3B.5010204@ipom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Rick Jones , jamal , netdev@vger.kernel.org, David Miller , Jeff Garzik Return-path: Received: from ns2.lanforge.com ([66.165.47.211]:35477 "EHLO ns2.lanforge.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965062AbWEYHT0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2006 03:19:26 -0400 To: Phil Dibowitz In-Reply-To: <44753A3B.5010204@ipom.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Phil Dibowitz wrote: > As for the clearing, in this case, the clearing is done by a command to > the hardware - and I believe the hardware does that atomically. However, > I could certainly add a spinlock around it if someone sees a need. No, because then you'd also have to add the spin-lock in the hot path to keep rx/tx threads from accessing counters at the same time. There is no way a patch that hurts performance like this will be accepted, but I'm still hopeful that a patch with zero or very near zero performance impact will be accepted. Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com