| To: | "Feldman, Scott" <scott.feldman@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: impressive throughput on 2.5.73 |
| From: | Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 3 Jul 2003 01:40:21 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | Dave Hansen <haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Nivedita Singhvi <niv@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <C6F5CF431189FA4CBAEC9E7DD5441E010107DA9D@orsmsx402.jf.intel.com> |
| References: | <C6F5CF431189FA4CBAEC9E7DD5441E010107DA9D@orsmsx402.jf.intel.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Feldman, Scott wrote:
> Interrupt mitigation must be on if you're only getting 9K intr/sec. If
> you where getting one interrupt per packet, you'd see an order of
> magnitude higher intr/sec rate.
What about the e1000 hw interrupt mitigation, isn't the interrupt throttle
on by default?
Zwane
--
function.linuxpower.ca
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: impressive throughput on 2.5.73, Dave Hansen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH] ATM: CLIP: C99 initializers, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: impressive throughput on 2.5.73, Dave Hansen |
| Next by Thread: | Disconnecting a connected UDP socket, Shibu LKML |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |