Subject: Re: [PATCH] [NET] Size listen hash tables using backlog hint

From: Eric Dumazet <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:11:35 +0200

On Thursday 19 October 2006 10:41, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <[email-masked]>
> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:29:00 +0200
>
> > Cons :
> > TLB cost
>
> For those hot x86 and x86_64 cpus you tend to be using, this
> particular cost is relatively small.  :-) It's effectively like
> another memory reference in the worst case, in the best case
> it's "free".

Well, it was a private joke with you, as you  *use* machines that take a fault 
on a TLB miss :) 

BTW I do care of old machines too...