netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Preallocated skb's?

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Preallocated skb's?
From: yodaiken@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:36:32 -0600
Cc: Donald Becker <becker@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.20.0009142212110.25283-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from jamal on Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 10:26:08PM -0400
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10009141723530.1335-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.GSO.4.20.0009142212110.25283-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 10:26:08PM -0400, jamal wrote:
> 
> 
> One of the things we need to measure still is the latency. The scheme
> currently used with dynamically adjusting the mitigation parameters might
> not affect latency much -- simply because the adjustement is based on the
> load. We still have to prove this. The theory is:
> Under a lot of congestion, you delay longer because the layers above
> you are congested as gauged from a feedback; and under low congestion, you
> should theoretically adjust all the way down to 1 interupt/packet. Under
> heavy load, your latency is already screwed anyways because of large
> backlog queue; this is regardless of mitigation.

Or maybe the extra delay in congested circumstances will cause more 
timeouts and that's precisely when you need to improve latency?


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------
Victor Yodaiken 
Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company.
 www.fsmlabs.com  www.rtlinux.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>