Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756259AbYAOU00 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:26:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751907AbYAOU0P (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:26:15 -0500 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]:64077 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751662AbYAOU0O (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:26:14 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=h3e/pk7lYjHpwlCLZTK7+HiBiqSbnDxN4ILr3WxoRjeJ8TH1ZAfHceeqiaj5V+vUL1OccAraz374pZmTQRw0Hcbjn+9UKAqFTD/yWevD8/xDE8ZwV2YW54yxPSBtO26iEQhKihz0c0UIAkAqpfZJugRr1zVy1ZhNN5l3FUel7vw= Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:29:05 +0100 From: Jarek Poplawski To: Chris Friesen Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: questions on NAPI processing latency and dropped network packets Message-ID: <20080115202905.GA2680@ami.dom.local> References: <20080115071950.GA1696@ff.dom.local> <478CC76B.1020804@nortel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <478CC76B.1020804@nortel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1199 Lines: 29 On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 08:47:07AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: > Jarek Poplawski wrote: > >> IMHO, checking this with a current stable, which probably you are going >> to do some day, anyway, should be 100% acceptable: giving some input to >> netdev, while still working for yourself. > > While I would love to do this, it's not that simple. ...Hmm... As a matter of fact, I expected you'd treat my point less literally... Of course, I know it could be sometimes very hard to get something working even after upgrading one version, let alone several at once. So, it was more a rhetorical trick (sorry!) to suggest, that such a business model of being always late with kernels might be quite practical and reasonable for many companies, but looks like the worst possible development model for Linux. On the other hand, it seems there are not so much, nor expensive changes needed (a bit more perspective thinking?) to make everybody happy... Jarek P. -- 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/