On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2017 15:46:27 +0200
> Fredrik Markstrom wrote:
>
>> From: Fredrik Markström
>>
>> is_skb_forwardable() currently checks if the packet size is <= mtu of
>> the receiving interface. Thi
atch: if veth has some notion on L2 MTU (e.g. buffer size limits),
> there has to be checks for it. I don't know why configuring MRU helps, more
> config, more mistakes. If there is no need for dropping the packet: don't.
>
> Teco
>
>
>> Op 11 mei 2017, om 21:10
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:44 PM, Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2017 21:10:11 +0200
> Fredrik Markström wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Stephen Hemminger
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 11 May 2017 15:46:27 +0200
>> > Fredrik Markstrom wr
Resending beause it bounced of linux-kernel (google inbox sends
everything as html) !
Thanks for your quick response, I'll elaborate on the Changelog.
Regarding the global spinlock I considered adding it to task_struct
and signal_struct. My reasoning not to do it, flawed or not, was that
I though
Hello Peter, your patch helps with some of the cases but not all:
(the "called with.." below means cputime_adjust() is called with the
values specified in it's struct task_cputime argument.)
It helps when called with:
sum_exec_runtime=10 utime=0 stime=1
... followed by...
sum_exec_runtim
2) Is there a preferred solution to the global spinlock ?
/Fredrik
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Fredrik Markström
wrote:
> Hello Peter, your patch helps with some of the cases but not all:
>
> (the "called with.." below means cputime_adjust() is called with the
> valu
debug turned on).
Sorry for not letting this go (I know I should) but I always feel bad
introducing per thread data.
/Fredrik
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 05:28:42PM +0200, Fredrik Markström wrote:
>> Hello Peter, the locking part lo
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 01:50:15PM +0200, Fredrik Markström wrote:
>> Excellent,
>
> Please do not top post.
Understood, sorry !
>
>> The reason I replaced the early bail with that last test is that I
>
On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:44 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 08:00:38PM +0000, Fredrik Markström wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:48 PM Robin Murphy wrote:
>> As far as I understand TPIDRURW isn't anything else then an architecture
>> specific p
seem to have gotten distracted...
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 05:34:11PM +0200, Fredrik Markström wrote:
>> Hello Peter, your patch helps with some of the cases but not all:
>
> Indeed, and barring cmpxchg_double(), which is not available on all
> platforms, the thing needs a
time = stime;
+ prev->utime = utime;
+ }
*ut = prev->utime;
*st = prev->stime;
/Fredrik
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Jason Low wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 17:28 +0200, Fredrik Markström wrote:
>> Hello Peter, the locking part looks good, I do
Just to let you know, I've tested your last patch and it solves all my
original problems (which is should since the code is functionally
equivalent).
/Fredrik
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 09:59:54AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > > + /*
>> >
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:48 PM, David Miller wrote:
>
> From: Fredrik Markstrom
> Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 14:44:36 +0200
>
> > Currently veth drops all packets larger then the mtu set on the
> > receiving end of the pair. This is inconsistent with most hardware
> > ethernet drivers.
>
> False.
>
>
Hello,
As I understand it the recommended way to force pending timers of a
core when trying to isolate it (runtime) is to use cpu hotplug. The
current implementation of cpu hotplug has a serious drawback in that
it uses stop_machine() which disturbs already isolated cores. This is
a serious proble
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:08 PM Mark Rutland wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 05:35:33PM +0200, Fredrik Markstrom wrote:
> > This makes getcpu() ~1000 times faster, this is very useful when
> > implementing per-cpu buffers in userspace (to avoid cache line
> > bouncing). As an example lttng ust b
The approach I suggested below with the vDSO data page will obviously
not work on smp, so suggestions are welcome.
/Fredrik
On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Fredrik Markström
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:08 PM Mark Rutland wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 05:35:33PM
16 matches
Mail list logo
