Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 15:21:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 15:21:42 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:31748 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 15:21:41 -0400 Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 21:26:19 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Nivedita Singhvi Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 Message-ID: <20020906212619.A28172@wotan.suse.de> References: <3D78C9BD.5080905@us.ibm.com> <53430559.1031304588@[10.10.2.3]> <3D78E7A5.7050306@us.ibm.com> <20020906202646.A2185@wotan.suse.de> <1031339954.3d78ffb257d22@imap.linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1031339954.3d78ffb257d22@imap.linux.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 658 Lines: 17 > If you just wanted to speed things up, you could get the > clients to specify ports instead of letting the kernel > cycle through for a free port..:) Better would be probably to change the kernel to keep a limited list of free ports in a free list. The grabbing a free port would be an O(1) operation. I'm not entirely sure it is worth it in this case. The locks are probably the majority of the cost. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/