| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Info: NAPI performance at "low" loads |
| From: | ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric W. Biederman) |
| Date: | 19 Sep 2002 09:03:39 -0600 |
| Cc: | alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxx, manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20020918.142250.130847722.davem@redhat.com> |
| References: | <1032381789.20498.151.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20020918.134630.127509858.davem@redhat.com> <1032383727.20463.155.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20020918.142250.130847722.davem@redhat.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 |
"David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > From: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: 18 Sep 2002 22:15:27 +0100 > > It doesnt matter what XFree86 is doing. Thats just to load the PCI bus > and jam it up to prove the point. It'll change your inb timing > > Understood. Maybe a more accurate wording would be "a fixed minimum > timing". Why? If I do an inb to a PCI-X device running at 133Mhz it should come back much faster than an inb from my serial port on the ISA port. What is the reason for the fixed minimum timing? Alan asserted there is a posting behavior difference, but that should not affect reads. What is different between mmio and pio to a pci device when doing reads that should make mmio faster? Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Info: NAPI performance at "low" loads, Eric W. Biederman |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Info: NAPI performance at "low" loads, Alan Cox |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Info: NAPI performance at "low" loads, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Info: NAPI performance at "low" loads, Alan Cox |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |