Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Marc St-Jean wrote:
> > I asked if the remaining section (above) was acceptable so we could
> retain our
> > buffer recycling which enhances throughput. I never received a rely
> so it was
> > left in my last patch.
> > The above comment now answers my part of my initial question. Are you
> aware of
> > a better way to implement this or must we lose all our recycling
> You can poke around on netdev and ask about skb recycling in a new
> thread, and propose something.
> I just know that having your own custom skb initialization is a
> non-starter. Any updates the main skb init code receives will
> inevitably -not- be propagate to your code, rapidly leading to an
> unmaintainable disconnect.
> skb recycling in general is an interesting area to explore, and others
> have poked around that area before. I bet googling for skb recycling
> would turn up some useful thoughts and past efforts.
I will resend the driver without the skb recycling shortly. We will need
to see if we can allocate resources to contribute to recycling at the
stack level later.