lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRE: arm: Optimization for ethernet MAC handling at91_ether.c
Date
From
On 1/12/2010 11:40 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> CC to netdev
>
> Le 12/01/2010 16:39, James Kosin a écrit :
>> Everyone,
>>
>> Since, a AT91_EMAC_TUND only happens when the transmitter is unable to
>> transfer the frame in time for a frame to be sent. It makes sense to
>> RETRY the packet in this condition in the ISR.
>> Or would this overcomplicate a simple task?
>> ... see below ...
>>
> ...
>
>>
>> ...
>> I do know there needs to be a bit more code then to handle the
>> successful case below this; but, this is enough to understand what I am
>> talking about. The UNDERRUN error should happen infrequently and in
>> ideal circumstances not happen at all.
>>
>
>
> If this happens once in a while, why do you want driver to retry the transmit ?

(a) It would improve performance by allowing the ISR to handle the re-transmit in this case.
(b) It would help in the case of small glitches that may happen from external SDRAM without taxing the polling required to handle the re-transmit of the packet... ie: overhead required to re-queue and initiate a packet delivery... since the packet is already scheduled for delivery now.

James
--
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: 2010-01-12 18:53    [W:2.053 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site