Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 06:42:45 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: mpm@selenic.com, sri@us.ibm.com, ak@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] TCP/IP Critical socket communication mechanism
Message-ID: <20051215054245.GD18862@brahms.suse.de>
References: <20051214092228.GC18862@brahms.suse.de> <1134582945.8698.17.camel@w-sridhar2.beaverton.ibm.com> <20051215033937.GC11856@waste.org> <20051214.203023.129054759.davem@davemloft.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20051214.203023.129054759.davem@davemloft.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1723
Lines: 42

On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 08:30:23PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
> Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:39:37 -0800
> 
> > I think we need a global receive pool and per-socket send pools.
> 
> Mind telling everyone how you plan to make use of the global receive
> pool when the allocation happens in the device driver and we have no
> idea which socket the packet is destined for?  What should be done for

In theory one could use multiple receive queue on intelligent enough
NIC with the NIC distingushing the sockets.

But that would be still a nasty "you need advanced hardware FOO to avoid
subtle problem Y" case. Also it would require lots of  driver hacking.

And most NICs seem to have limits on the size of the socket tables for this, which
means you would end up in a "only N sockets supported safely" situation,
with N likely being quite small on common hardware.

I think the idea of the original poster was that just freeing non critical packets
after a short time again would be good enough, but I'm a bit sceptical
on that.

> I truly dislike these patches being discussed because they are a
> complete hack, and admittedly don't even solve the problem fully.  I

I agree. 

> I think GFP_ATOMIC memory pools are more powerful than they are given
> credit for.  There is nothing preventing the implementation of dynamic

Their main problem is that they are used too widely and in a lot
of situations that aren't really critical.

-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/