| To: | Donald Becker <becker@xxxxxxxxx>, jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Queue and SMP locking discussion (was Re: 3c59x.c) |
| From: | Andrey Savochkin <saw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 1 Apr 2000 11:30:10 +0800 |
| Cc: | Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003311054490.2499-100000@vaio.greennet>; from "Donald Becker" on Fri, Mar 31, 2000 at 11:16:56AM |
| References: | <Pine.GSO.4.20.0003310847310.16592-100000@shell.cyberus.ca> <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003311054490.2499-100000@vaio.greennet> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hello,
On Fri, Mar 31, 2000 at 11:16:56AM -0500, Donald Becker wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2000, jamal wrote:
> > Mitigation (which seems to be added to some of Donalds drivers by Jeff
> > Garzik and Andrey Savochkin) will to a certain extent.
At least for eepro100, the receive interrupt mitigation doesn't exist in the
driver. There were some changes about TX completion interrupts, but I
consider them as rather irrelevant.
The other question is that it's possible to turn on hardware interrupt
mitigation on Intel's chips by uploading a microcode.
Intel's driver claims to do it.
Best regards
Andrey V.
Savochkin
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Queue and SMP locking discussion (was Re: 3c59x.c), Michael Richardson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: IPv6 send router advertisement, Wang Hui |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Queue and SMP locking discussion (was Re: 3c59x.c), Donald Becker |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Queue and SMP locking discussion (was Re: 3c59x.c), Donald Becker |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |