Re: [RFC] GRO scalability

On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 11:21 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:

Did I then mis-interpret:

quoted

2) Use a LRU list to eventually be able to 'flush' too old packets,
   even if the napi never completes. Each time we process a new packet,
   being a GRO candidate or not, we increment a napi->sequence, and we
   flush the oldest packet in gro_lru_list if its own sequence is too
   old.

in your initial RFC email?  Because I took that as flushing a given 
packet if N packets have come through since that packet was queued to 
await coalescing.

Yes, this was refined in the patch I sent.

Currently using jiffies, but my plan is trying to use get_cycles() or
ktime_get(), after some experiments, allowing cycles/ns resolution.

(One ktime_get() per napi batch seems OK)