From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@hartkopp.net>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Patch: [NET]: Remove CONFIG_PROC_FS depency for pcounter inuse
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:45:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47C95E12.609@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47C950B4.5040703@hartkopp.net>
Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
> Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
>>> It's not about the counter implementation but the integration/usage
>>> in the networking subsystem.
>>>
>>> Or does your mentioned patch mean, that the added functions in
>>> proto_[un|]register() will also be reverted?
>>>
>>
>> A patch will make inet use percpu_counter instead of pcounter.
>>
>> Then a zap patch will delete lib/pcounter.c & include/linux/pcounter.h
>>
>> I dont understand why you say CONFIG_PROC_FS is *forced*.
>> I can build a kernel with CONFIG_PROC_FS=n, with working INET.
> Right. With enabled CONFIG_EMBEDDED you might have CONFIG_INET with
> CONFIG_PROC_FS=n.
>
> But this is not the thing, i wanted to point out.
>
> My major concern was, that "whatever-per-cpu-counters" are
> allocated/initialized in "proto_register()" for *every* network protocol
> but *only* IPv[4|6] is using these counters (when CONFIG_PROC_FS is set).
>
> I just wanted to point out the situation for network protocols that do
> not need any inuse counters. In the current implementation the pcounters
> are allocated for every networking protocol in proto_register() which
> does not look optimized to me.
>
> Will this change with your patch that uses percpu_counter instead of
> pcounter??
>
Yes, everything will be cleaned by me.
We dont need to *optimize* something that will die very soon.
Thank you
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-01 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-01 5:19 Patch: [NET]: Remove CONFIG_PROC_FS depency for pcounter inuse Oliver Hartkopp
2008-03-01 9:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-01 11:22 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2008-03-01 12:02 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-01 12:48 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2008-03-01 13:45 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2008-03-01 13:52 ` Oliver Hartkopp
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=47C95E12.609@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver@hartkopp.net \
/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).