Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 15:16:32 -0700
From: Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@scalex86.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: shemminger@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       dipankar@in.ibm.com, bharata@in.ibm.com, shai@scalex86.org,
       rusty@rustcorp.com.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 7/11] net: Use bigrefs for net_device.refcount
Message-ID: <20050913221632.GB6249@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20050913155112.GB3570@localhost.localdomain> <20050913161012.GI3570@localhost.localdomain> <20050913092659.791bddec@localhost.localdomain> <20050913.132607.113443001.davem@davemloft.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20050913.132607.113443001.davem@davemloft.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1001
Lines: 25

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 01:26:07PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
> Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:26:59 -0700
> 
> > Since when is bringing a network device up/down performance critical?
> 
> The issue is the dev_get()'s that occur all over the place
> to during packet transmit/receive, that's what they are
> trying to address.
> 
> I'm still against all of these invasive NUMA changes to the
> networking though, they are simply too ugly and special cased
> to consider seriously.

All of them or the dst ones?  Hopefully the netdevice refcounter patch
is not ugly or complicated as the dst ones? And why are they special cased?
Are networking workloads with high route locality not interesting?

Thanks,
Kiran
-
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/