Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261649AbVB1Pbv (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:31:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261650AbVB1Pbv (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:31:51 -0500 Received: from mx02.cybersurf.com ([209.197.145.105]:28377 "EHLO mx02.cybersurf.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261649AbVB1Pbp (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:31:45 -0500 Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: A common layer for Accounting packages From: jamal Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca To: Thomas Graf Cc: Andrew Morton , Guillaume Thouvenin , kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com, marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com, "David S. Miller" , jlan@sgi.com, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, elsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <20050228142551.GQ31837@postel.suug.ch> References: <4221E548.4000008@ak.jp.nec.com> <20050227140355.GA23055@logos.cnet> <42227AEA.6050002@ak.jp.nec.com> <1109575236.8549.14.camel@frecb000711.frec.bull.fr> <20050227233943.6cb89226.akpm@osdl.org> <1109592658.2188.924.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050228132051.GO31837@postel.suug.ch> <1109598010.2188.994.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050228135307.GP31837@postel.suug.ch> <1109599803.2188.1014.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050228142551.GQ31837@postel.suug.ch> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: jamalopolous Message-Id: <1109604693.1072.8.camel@jzny.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 Date: 28 Feb 2005 10:31:33 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1238 Lines: 29 On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 09:25, Thomas Graf wrote: > * jamal <1109599803.2188.1014.camel@jzny.localdomain> 2005-02-28 09:10 [..] > > To justify writting the new code, I am assuming someone has actually sat > > down and in the minimal stuck their finger in the air > > and said "yes, there is definetely wind there". > > I did, not for this problem though. The code this idea comes from sends > batched events I would bet the benefit you are seeing has to do with batching rather than such an optimization flag. Different ballgame. I relooked at their code snippet, they dont even have skbs built nor even figured out what sock or PID. That work still needs to be done it seems in cn_netlink_send(). So probably all they need to do is move the check in cn_netlink_send() instead. This is assuming they are not scratching their heads with some realted complexities. I am gonna disapear for a while; hopefully the original posters have gathered some ideas from what we discussed. cheers, jamal - 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/