| To: | rick.jones2@xxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:43:48 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, becker@xxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <42B9CBA2.5050208@xxxxxx> |
| References: | <20050622180654.GX14251@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050622.132241.21929037.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <42B9CBA2.5050208@xxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@xxxxxx> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:35:46 -0700 > > Everyone seems to have this absolute fetish about batching the RX > > descriptor refilling work. It's wrong, it should be done when you > > pull a receive packet off the ring, for many reasons. Off the top of > > my head: > > > > 1) Descriptors are refilled as soon as possible, decreasing > > the chance of the device hitting the end of the RX ring > > and thus unable to receive a packet. > > IFF one pokes the NIC for each buffer right? Or "every 5" or something like that. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Rick Jones |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [patch,rfc] allow registration of multiple netpolls per interface, Jeff Moyer |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Rick Jones |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |