Re: [PATCH 07/17] net: convert sock.sk_refcnt from atomic_t to refcount_t
- Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 18:21:21 -0700 (PDT)
- From: David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/17] net: convert sock.sk_refcnt from atomic_t to refcount_t
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 00:47:59 +0800
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2017-03-17 at 07:42 +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
>>> Should we then first measure the actual numbers to understand what we
>>> are talking here about?
>>> I would be glad to do it if you suggest what is the correct way to do
>>> measurements here to actually reflect the real life use cases.
>> How have these patches been tested in real life exactly ?
>> Can you quantify number of added cycles per TCP packet, where I expect
>> we have maybe 20 atomic operations in all layers ...
> I completely agree. I think this thing needs to default to the
> existing atomic_t behaviour.
I totally agree as well, the refcount_t facility as-is is unacceptable