| To: | Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 8 Oct 2001 12:11:12 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@xxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>, Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <E15qczg-00011N-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > Agreed if you add the polling cardbus bit. > > Note polling cardbus would require more changes than the above. > > I don't think it does. I was repsonding to your earlier comment that: > Once you disable the IRQ and kick over to polling the cardbus and the > ethernet both still get regular service. Ok so your pps rate and your > latency are unpleasant, but you are not dead. basically pointing that we'll need more work to be done to get Ingos patch to poll the cardbus and eth0 in the example i gave. those will have to be per driver. Did i miss something? Agree on your other points there cheers, jamal |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, Alan Cox |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, Robert Olsson |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, Alan Cox |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, Pavel Machek |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |