From: Tom Herbert <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:05:26 -0800 > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 15/02/2017 6:57 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> Isn't it the same principle in page_frag_alloc() ? >>>> It is called form __netdev_alloc_skb()/__napi_alloc_skb(). >>>> >>>> Why is it ok to have order-3 pages (PAGE_FRAG_CACHE_MAX_ORDER) there? >>> >>> This is not ok. >>> >>> This is a very well known problem, we already mentioned that here in the >>> past, >>> but at least core networking stack uses order-0 pages on PowerPC. >> >> You're right, we should have done this as well in mlx4 on PPC. >>> >>> mlx4 driver suffers from this problem 100% more than other drivers ;) >>> >>> One problem at a time Tariq. Right now, only mlx4 has this big problem >>> compared to other NIC. >> >> We _do_ agree that the series improves the driver's quality, stability, >> and performance in a fragmented system. >> >> But due to the late rc we're in, and the fact that we know what benchmarks >> our customers are going to run, we cannot Ack the series and get it >> as is inside kernel 4.11. >> > You're admitting that Eric's patches improve driver quality, > stability, and performance but you're not allowing this in the kernel > because "we know what benchmarks our customers are going to run". > Sorry, but that is a weak explanation. I have to agree with Tom and Eric. If your customers have gotten into the habit of using metrics which actually do not represent real life performance, that is a completely inappropriate reason to not include Eric's changes as-is. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
