User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Re: [PATCH v7 0/8] Request for inclusion: tcp memory buffers

From:  David Miller <>
Subject:  Re: [PATCH v7 0/8] Request for inclusion: tcp memory buffers
Date:  Thu, 13 Oct 2011 16:12:21 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID:  <>
Archive-link:  Article

From: Glauber Costa <>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:05:58 +0400

> Also, I kind of dispute the affirmation that !cgroup will encompass
> the majority of users, since cgroups is being enabled by default by
> most vendors. All systemd based systems use it extensively, for
> instance.

I will definitely advise people against this, since the cost of having
this on by default is absolutely non-trivial.

People keep asking every few releases "where the heck has my performance
gone" and it's because of creeping features like this.  This socket
cgroup feature is a prime example of where that kind of stuff comes

I really get irritated when people go "oh, it's just one indirect
function call" and "oh, it's just one more pointer in struct sock"

We work really hard to _remove_ elements from structures and make them
smaller, and to remove expensive operations from the fast paths.

It might take someone weeks if not months to find a way to make a
patch which compensates for the extra overhead your patches are adding.

And I don't think you fully appreciate that.

To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to  For more info on Linux MM,
see: .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign
Don't email: <a href=mailto:""> </a>

(Log in to post comments)

Copyright © 2011, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds