| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch |
| From: | "Michael Chan" <mchan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 03 Jun 2005 12:49:29 -0700 |
| Cc: | mitch.a.williams@xxxxxxxxx, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, john.ronciak@xxxxxxxxx, jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx, ganesh.venkatesan@xxxxxxxxx, jesse.brandeburg@xxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050603.132922.63997492.davem@davemloft.net> |
| References: | <20050603.120126.41874584.davem@davemloft.net> <Pine.CYG.4.58.0506031202280.3344@mawilli1-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> <20050603.132257.23013342.davem@davemloft.net> <20050603.132922.63997492.davem@davemloft.net> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 13:29 -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > E1000 processes the full QUOTA of RX packets, > _THEN_ replenishes with new RX buffers. No wonder > the chip runs out of RX descriptors. > > You should replenish _AS_ you grab RX packets > off the receive queue, just as tg3 does. Yes, in tg3, rx buffers are replenished and put back into the ring as completed packets are taken off the ring. But we don't tell the chip about these new buffers until we get to the end of the loop, potentially after a full quota of packets. Doesn't this make the end result the same as e1000? |
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH 2/2] ieee80211: Update generic definitions to latest specs - take #2, Gertjan van Wingerde |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Lennert Buytenhek |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Lennert Buytenhek |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |