I have submitted this patchset from Version 1 to Version 7 already in
the past few months.
Here is the link to the patchset:

http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2011/05/28/

I am working on V8 now.

Thanks
Shirley


On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 16:35 -0700, David Miller wrote:

From: Shirley Ma <redacted>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:51:32 -0700

quoted

On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 15:54 -0700, David Miller wrote:

quoted

From: Shirley Ma <redacted>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:45:10 -0700

quoted

To support skb zero-copy, a pointer is needed to add to skb share

info.

quoted

Do you agree with this approach? If not, do you have any other
suggestions?

I really can't form an opinion unless I am shown the complete
implementation, what this give us in return, what the impact is,

etc. 
 ..

quoted

You can see the overall CPU saved 50% w/i zero-copy.

The impact is every skb allocation consumed one more pointer in skb
share info, and a pointer check in skb release when last reference

is

quoted

gone.

For skb clone, skb expand private head and skb copy, it still keeps

copy

quoted

the buffers to kernel, so we can avoid user application, like

tcpdump to

quoted

hold the user-space buffers too long.

Ok, now show me the "complete implementation".  I'm as interested in
the code as I am in the numbers, that's why I asked for both.