Re: [RFC][PATCH] TTY flip buffer SMP changes

[Alan Cox]

On Gwe, 2004-10-08 at 14:35, Paul Fulghum wrote:
> It does seem to carry serious overhead (in relation
> to ring buffers) for devices with small FIFOs.

Thats one reason I wanted sk_buff like rather than sk_buff. I want
to be able to recycle buffers back to drivers when the driver thinks
its the right thing to do.

Then you get something like

next_buffer()
{
	new_buf = tty->nextbuf;
	if(!new_buf)
		new_buf = grow_tty_buf(tty);
	queue_to_ldisc(tty->buf);
	tty->buf = newbuf;
}

and "free" most of the time can simply queue the buffer back to the tty.
That degenerates into flip buffers in good conditions..

> to the line discipline. This amounts to ~3600 sk_buff
> allocations per second at 115200bps.

Ethernet packets at 1500bytes arriving at 100Mbit is rather higher than
that, and the processing demands are higher too


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/