From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Date: 26 Sep 2002 02:31:13 +0200
"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> writes:
>
> In fact the exact opposite, such a suggested flow cache is about
> as parallel as you can make it.
It sounds more like it would include the FIB too.
That's the second level cache, not the top level lookup which
is what hits %99 of the time.
The current FIBs have a bit heavier locking at least. Fine grain locking
btrees is also not easy/nice.
Also not necessary, only the top level cache really needs to be
top performance.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 30 2002 - 22:00:24 EST