From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 2/2] udp: No longer use SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 09:15:00 -0700 Message-ID: <56F95884.8010901@hpe.com> References: <1458944964-12890-1-git-send-email-edumazet@google.com> <1458944964-12890-3-git-send-email-edumazet@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev , Eric Dumazet , Tom Herbert To: Eric Dumazet , "David S . Miller" Return-path: Received: from g9t1613g.houston.hp.com ([15.240.0.71]:59976 "EHLO g9t1613g.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753863AbcC1QPH (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Mar 2016 12:15:07 -0400 Received: from g4t3428.houston.hp.com (g4t3428.houston.hp.com [15.201.208.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by g9t1613g.houston.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D8C463148 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:15:06 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <1458944964-12890-3-git-send-email-edumazet@google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/25/2016 03:29 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > UDP sockets are not short lived in the high usage case, so the added > cost of call_rcu() should not be a concern. Even a busy DNS resolver? rick jones