From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264369AbTKZXif (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:38:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264387AbTKZXie (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:38:34 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:65251 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264369AbTKZXic (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:38:32 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:38:30 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Andi Kleen , davem@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Fire Engine?? Message-ID: <20031126233830.GB5274@wotan.suse.de> References: <20031125183035.1c17185a.davem@redhat.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <20031127000145.61187530.ak@suse.de> <16325.13797.417933.122067@charged.uio.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16325.13797.417933.122067@charged.uio.no> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > There are a still few inefficiencies with this approach, though. Most > notable is the fact that you need to call kmap_atomic() several times > per page since the socket lower layers will usually be feeding you 1 > skb at a time. I thought you might be referring to those (and that you > might have a good solution to propose ;-)) For kmap_atomic? Run a x86-64 box ;-) In general doing things with more than one packet at a time would be probably a good idea, but I don't have any deep thoughts on how to implement this for TCP RX. -Andi