Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] net: low latency Ethernet device polling

From: Cong Wang <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 15:37:56 +0800

On 02/28/2013 01:55 AM, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
>
> Open issues:
> 1. Find a way to avoid the need to change the sk and skb structs.
> One big disadvantage of how we do this right now is that when a device is
> removed, it's hard to prevent it from getting polled by a socket
> which holds a stale reference.
>
> 2. How do we decide which sockets are eligible to do busy polling?
> Do we add a socket option to control this?
> How do we provide sane defaults while allowing flexibility and performance?
>
> 3. Andi Kleen and HPA pointed out that using get_cycles() is not portable.
>
> 4. How and where do we call ndo_ll_poll from the socket code?
> One good place seems to be wherever the kernel puts the process to sleep,
> waiting for more data, but this makes doing something intelligent about
> poll (the system call) hard. From the perspective of how ndo_ll_poll
> itself is implemented this does not seem to matter.
>
> 5. I would like to hear suggestions on naming conventions and where
> to put the code that for now I have put in include/net/ll_poll.h
>

A dumb question: is bypassing tcpdump/netfilters/qdisc etc. what we 
always want? Isn't this a security issue?

Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel&#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired