[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5
From: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 17:00:02 -0700
Cc: Robert Love <rml@xxxxxxxxx>, Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alex Bligh - linux-kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, mingo@xxxxxxx, jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Candela Technologies Inc
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0110041650410.975-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On 4 Oct 2001, Robert Love wrote:
> >
> > Agreed.  I am actually amazed that the opposite of what is happening
> > does not happen -- that more people aren't clamoring for this solution.
> Ehh.. I think that most people who are against Ingo's patches are so
> mainly because there _is_ an alternative that looks nicer.
>                 Linus

The alternative (NAPI) only works with Tulip and Intel NICs, it seems.
When the alternative works for every driver known (including 3rd party
ones, like the e100), then it will truly be an alternative.  Untill
then, it will be a great feature for those who can use it, and the
rest of the poor folks will need a big generic hammer.

>From personal experince, I imagine the problem is also that it was
not invented here, where here is where each of sit.  And I include
myself in that bias!


Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>       <Ben_Greear AT>
President of Candela Technologies Inc

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