Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Oct 2007 11:08:08 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing |
| |
* Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
> * I feel TX NAPI is a useful tool, because it provides an independent TX > process control point and system load feedback point. > Thus I felt this was slightly superior to tasklets.
/me agrees violently
btw., when i played with this tunable under -rt:
enum { NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT, NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_CPU }; static int optimization_mode = NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT;
the MODE_CPU one gave (much) _higher_ bandwidth. The queueing model in forcedeth seemed to be not that robust and i think a single queueing model should be adopted instead of this tunable. (which i think just hid some bug/dependency) But i never got to the bottom of it so it's just the impression i got.
Ingo - 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/
| |