lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5


On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Ingo Molnar wrote:

>
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, jamal wrote:
>
> (and the only thing i pointed out was that the patch as-is did not limit
> the amount of polling done.)

you mean in the softirq or the one line in the driver?

>
> > > *if* you can make polling a success in ~90% of the time we enter
> > > tulip_poll() under non-specific server load (ie. not routing), then i
> > > think you have really good metrics.
> >
> > we can make it 100% successful; i mentioned that we only do work, if
> > there is work to be done.
>
> can you really make it 100% successful for rx? Ie. do you only ever call
> the ->poll() function if there is a new packet waiting? How do you know
> with a 100% probability that someone on the network just sent a new packet
> waiting? (without receiving an interrupt to begin with that is.)
>

Take a look at what i think is the NAPI state machine pending a nod
from Alexey and Robert:
http://www.cyberus.ca/~hadi/NAPI-SM.ps.gz

cheers,
jamal


-
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 13:04    [W:0.159 / U:4.464 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site