From: Vlad Yasevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 10:46:42 -0400
> David Miller wrote:
> > If, on the other hand, you know you have exclusive access to the
> > skb and there are no other references, setting skb->truesize can
> > be OK. However setting it to sizeof(struct sk_buff) doe
Hi David
Thanks for the answer.
David Miller wrote:
> From: Vlad Yasevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:16:57 -0400
>
>> I've attached the patch, in case people want to look at the code.
>>
>> However, we question if this is a good idea or if this is going to break
>> things...
From: Vlad Yasevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:16:57 -0400
> I've attached the patch, in case people want to look at the code.
>
> However, we question if this is a good idea or if this is going to break
> things...
Modification of skb->truesize is very dangerous and is only l
Hi Folks
I was looking at SCTP performance problem that is a result of
receive buffer exhaustion and found the we severely overcharge
the receive buffer when multiple data chunks are bundled together.
This bundling usually happens at retransmit time which penalizes us
even more.
Here is what happ
