On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:28:13 -0600 Olof Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I noticed this when looking at an openswan issue. Openswan (ab?)uses > the tasklet API to defer processing of packets in some situations, > with one packet per tasklet_action(). I started noticing sequences of > reverse-ordered sequence numbers coming over the wire, since new tasklets > are always queued at the head of the list but processed sequentially. > > Convert it to instead append new entries to the tail of the list. As an > extra bonus, the splicing code in takeover_tasklets() no longer has to > iterate over the list. > hm, I'd have thought that this would already have caused problems in networking. And perhaps this change might have effects on networking too? Probably it won't have _much_ effect on networking because networking probably isn't queueing one tasklet per packet(!) but perhaps with bonded channels or something like that? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
