| To: | Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation |
| From: | "John W. Linville" <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:42:53 -0400 |
| Cc: | Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ayaz Abdulla <AAbdulla@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20051021202908.GA18966@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Mail-followup-to: | Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ayaz Abdulla <AAbdulla@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <43592FE5.20106@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051021202908.GA18966@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 10:29:08PM +0200, Francois Romieu wrote: > Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> : > > The current forcedeth driver doesn't support interrupt mitigation, this > > can result in an incredible number of interrupts/sec for gigabit links. > > The attached patch adds a throughput mode that enables an interrupt > > mitigation scheme. > > Naïve question: what about the NAPI way ? I was thinking the same thing...although it appears forcedeth already supports NAPI... What does this offer over the NAPI support? John -- John W. Linville linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation, Francois Romieu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation, Jeff Garzik |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation, Francois Romieu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation, Jeff Garzik |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |