netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5

To: mingo@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5
From: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 20:53:58 +0400 (MSK DST)
Cc: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx, bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0110031702280.7221-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> from "Ingo Molnar" at Oct 3, 1 05:28:08 pm
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hello!

> In a generic computing environment i want to spend cycles doing useful
> work, not polling.

Ingo, "polling" is wrong name. It does not poll. :-)
Actually, this misnomer is the worst thing whic I worried about.

Citing my old explanation:

>"Polling" is not a real polling in fact, it just accepts irqs as
>events waking rx softirq with blocking subsequent irqs.
>Actual receive happens at softirq.
>
>Seems, this approach solves the worst half of livelock problem completely:
>irqs are throttled and tuned to load automatically.
>Well, and drivers become cleaner.

Alexey

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