![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Pawe? Krawczyk wrote: > > so i think the limit is at the eepro100 card. is there any way to > > improve the throughput? or someone got a higher throughput then > > that? the eepro100 chip is 82559. > > Use e100 driver from Intel [1] with the following parameters: > > insmod e100.o BundleSmallFr=1 IntDelay=0x600 ucode=1 > > Intel's driver supports all the interrupt saving features (interrupt > delay and small packet bundling) present in EEPro/100 cards. The driver > is now GPL, so it should get back to the mainstream kernel. I don't think you will get better than 90% performance, but if you do please let me know! I have written another e100 driver, in an attempt to transmit and receive small packets at the maximum possible rate. In tests, it would not even transmit at 100% small packets on our 82558. (I didn't do that test on our 82559). Ah well.. Curiously, I found that turning on the interrupt saving microcode slows the cards down. It lessens the load on the mainboard CPU, but I am not using interrupts, I'm polling the memory descriptors 100% of the time, so the interrupt saving microcode shouldn't affect the mainboard CPU. It does lower the throughput though. -- Jamie - 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/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:27 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||