1. 18 2月, 2017 38 次提交
  2. 17 2月, 2017 2 次提交
    • E
      mlx4: do not fire tasklet unless necessary · 01f0f425
      Eric Dumazet 提交于
      All rx and rx netdev interrupts are handled by respectively
      by mlx4_en_rx_irq() and mlx4_en_tx_irq() which simply schedule a NAPI.
      
      But mlx4_eq_int() also fires a tasklet to service all items that were
      queued via mlx4_add_cq_to_tasklet(), but this handler was not called
      unless user cqe was handled.
      
      This is very confusing, as "mpstat -I SCPU ..." show huge number of
      tasklet invocations.
      
      This patch saves this overhead, by carefully firing the tasklet directly
      from mlx4_add_cq_to_tasklet(), removing four atomic operations per IRQ.
      Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
      Cc: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>
      Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>
      Acked-by: NSaeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      01f0f425
    • D
      Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec-next · 99d5ceee
      David S. Miller 提交于
      Steffen Klassert says:
      
      ====================
      pull request (net-next): ipsec-next 2017-02-16
      
      1) Make struct xfrm_input_afinfo const, nothing writes to it.
         From Florian Westphal.
      
      2) Remove all places that write to the afinfo policy backend
         and make the struct const then.
         From Florian Westphal.
      
      3) Prepare for packet consuming gro callbacks and add
         ESP GRO handlers. ESP packets can be decapsulated
         at the GRO layer then. It saves a round through
         the stack for each ESP packet.
      
      Please note that this has a merge coflict between commit
      
      63fca65d ("net: add confirm_neigh method to dst_ops")
      
      from net-next and
      
      3d7d25a6 ("xfrm: policy: remove garbage_collect callback")
      a2817d8b ("xfrm: policy: remove family field")
      
      from ipsec-next.
      
      The conflict can be solved as it is done in linux-next.
      
      Please pull or let me know if there are problems.
      ====================
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      99d5ceee