| To: | "Feldman, Scott" <scott.feldman@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: More 2.4.22pre10 ACPI breakage |
| From: | Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 11 Aug 2003 00:22:50 +0200 |
| Cc: | "Jeff Garzik" <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>, "Samuel Flory" <sflory@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <C6F5CF431189FA4CBAEC9E7DD5441E01022292E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <C6F5CF431189FA4CBAEC9E7DD5441E01022292E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Feldman, Scott writes:
> NAPI always-poll mode...that would be fun to play with...
> Is this what you're thinking: 1) block any place the driver enables
> interrupts so interrupts stay disabled, 2) ignore netif_rx_complete so
> we stay in polling mode, 3) ignore return code from netdev->poll.
>
> For 1), the driver needs some way to know that we're in always-poll-mode
> so enabling interrupts is a nop.
>
I will work but I doubt the usefulness of it as we spin aggressively even
when there low or no load. This as NAPI tries to serve your dev->poll
fastest possible given the fairness conditions are met.
I could think of a variant...
As dev->poll is callback we could possibly schedule (and delay) via a timer
or something with in turn does the the schedule dev->poll for us. We have
to return netif_rx_complete and have RX-buffers etc.
> Just thinking out loud - haven't tried any of this.
Same here... :-)
Cheers.
--ro
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Ethernet bridge performance, Robert Olsson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: [SET 2][PATCH 2/8][bonding] Propagating master's settings to slaves, jamal |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: More 2.4.22pre10 ACPI breakage, Feldman, Scott |
| Next by Thread: | VLAN patch try 2, tabs instead of spaces, Ben Greear |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |