Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\]\s+Break\s+\'budget\'\s+dependency\s+on\s+netdev_max_backlog\.\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:46:50 -0700
ver the in-kern
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00364.html (11,530 bytes)

2. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 08:51:46 -0400 (EDT)
ulip-20020915 N
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00370.html (12,534 bytes)

3. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 09:25:52 -0700
rectly with thi
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00379.html (9,698 bytes)

4. šใƒผใ‚ธใ‚’ใŸใใ•ใ‚“ใฎๆ–นใธ่ฆ‹ใฆใ‚‚ใ‚‰ใˆใ‚‹ๆ–นๆณ• (score: 1)
Author: Princess Rose Ike" <roseike98@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 20:47:19 -0400 (EDT)
ฆญํ•˜์„ธ์š”. ํšŒ์‚ฌ์†Œ๊ฐœ | ๊ด‘๊ณ ๋ฌธ์˜ | ๊ฐœ์ธ์ •๋ณด๋ณดํ˜ธ์ •์ฑ… | ์ด์šฉ์•ฝ๊ด€๊ตํ™˜/๋ฐ˜ํ’ˆ ๊ทœ์ •์•ˆ๋‚ด Copyright (c)2002 K-Richmall All rights reserved. Email: richmall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx โ˜Ž Tel : 053-814-0383 / Fax : 053-817-
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00414.html (9,549 bytes)

5. so? (score: 1)
Author: 200oramd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <mdsk25200oramd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 18:06:13 -0700
กœ ํ™•์ธํ•ด ๋ณด์„ธ์š”! ๋ฌด์กฐ๊ฑด ์„ฑ์ธ๋งŒ ์ž…์žฅํ•˜์„ธ์š”~ http://sexsexok.com ์„œ์šธ์‹œ ๋™๋Œ€๋ฌธ๊ตฌ ์‹ ์„ค๋™ 230-53๋ฒˆ์ง€ 3์ธต ์„น์Šค์„น์Šค์˜ค์ผ€์ด๋‹ท์ปด ์ •๋ณดํ†ต์‹ ๋ถ€ ๊ถŒ๊ณ  ์‚ฌํ•ญ์— ์˜๊ฑฐ ์ œ๋ชฉ์— [์„ฑ์ธ๊ด‘๊ณ ]๋ผ๊ณ  ํ‘œ๊ธฐํ•œ ์„ฑ์ธ๊ด‘๊ณ  ๋ฉ”์ผ์ž…๋‹ˆ๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜์‹ ์„ ์›
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00417.html (11,708 bytes)

6. i-diag output) (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 21:18:40 -0400 (EDT)
์‚ฌํ•ญ์— ์˜๊ฑฐ ์ œ๋ชฉ์— [๊ด‘๊ณ ]๋ผ๊ณ  ํ‘œ๊ธฐํ•œ ๊ด‘๊ณ  ๋ฉ”์ผ์ž…๋‹ˆ๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜์‹ ์„ ์›์น˜ ์•Š์œผ์‹œ๋ฉด ์ˆ˜์‹ ๊ฑฐ๋ถ€๋ฅผ ๋ˆŒ๋Ÿฌ์ฃผ์„ธ์š” . &nbs p; &n bsp; &nbs p; Reject/Remove ์ด ์ •๋ณด๋Š” ์ฒญ์†Œ๋…„ ์œ ํ•ด๋งค์ฒด๋ฌผ๋กœ์„œ ์ •๋ณดํ†ต์‹ ๋ง ์ด์šฉ์ด‰์ง„ ๋ฐ ์ •๋ณด๋ณดํ˜ธ๋“ฑ์— ๊ด€ํ•œ ๋ฒ•๋ฅ  ๋ฐ ์ฒญ์†Œ๋…„ ๋ณดํ˜ธ๋ฒ•์˜ ๊ทœ์ •์— ์˜ํ•˜์—ฌ 19์„ธ ๋ฏธ๋งŒ์˜ ์ฒญ์†Œ๋…„์ด ์ด์šฉํ• ์ˆ˜ ์—†์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค. ๋ฏธ์„ฑ๋…„์ž ๋˜๋Š”
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00422.html (9,617 bytes)

7. log. (score: 1)
Author: reearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 19:37:02 -0700
๋…„์ž ๋˜๋Š”
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00424.html (10,361 bytes)

8. put) (score: 1)
Author: W Damasio <felipewd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 23:21:08 -0400 (EDT)
that useful. For some reason i thought you were introducing NET_CORE_DEV_WEIGHT which happens to already exist with default value of 64. The value
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00427.html (9,242 bytes)

9. PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 20:43:00 -0700
adi/patches Id rather not tell you since we are still evaluating its usefullness and it may not be there next week. Anyways, i put a patched drive
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00428.html (11,157 bytes)

10. on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: hockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 23:44:35 -0400 (EDT)
— ํ˜์˜ค๊ฐ์ด ์žˆ์œผ์‹  ๋ถ„์€ ๋ฐ”๋กœ ์‚ญ์ œํ•˜์—ฌ ์ฃผ์‹ญ์‹œ์˜ค. ๋” ์ด์ƒ ๋ง์ด ํ•„์š” ์—†์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค. ์ผ๋‹จ ํด๋ฆญํ•˜์„ธ์š”. ์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด ์ƒˆ์ƒ์ด ํŽผ์ณ์ง‘๋‹ˆ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์›น์‚ฌ์ดํŠธ๋Š” ์ธํ„ฐ๋„ท ์„ฑ์ธ ์ „๋ฌธ ํฌ๋ฅด๋…ธ ์‚ฌ์ดํŠธ๋กœ, ๋ฒ•์ ์œผ๋กœ ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋‚ด์šฉ์„ ์—ด๋žŒํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์—†๋Š” ๋งŒ 20์„ธ์˜ ์—ฐ๋ น ๋ฏธ๋งŒ์ด๋‚˜ ์ด์™€๊ฐ™์€ ์Œ๋ž€ํ•œ ๋‚ด์šฉ์—
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00430.html (9,752 bytes)

11. PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: reear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 21:00:59 -0700
์ธ ์ „๋ฌธ ํฌ๋ฅด๋…ธ ์‚ฌ์ดํŠธ๋กœ, ๋ฒ•์ ์œผ๋กœ ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋‚ด์šฉ์„ ์—ด๋žŒํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์—†๋Š” ๋งŒ 20์„ธ์˜ ์—ฐ๋ น ๋ฏธ๋งŒ์ด๋‚˜ ์ด์™€๊ฐ™์€ ์Œ๋ž€ํ•œ ๋‚ด์šฉ์—
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00431.html (10,036 bytes)

12. PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: d Becker <becker@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 23:58:27 -0400 (EDT)
wrote: jamal wrote: Patch looks fine except for the 300 number. What are you smoking? Please retain the original value. The original value was 300, what d
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00432.html (8,973 bytes)

13. [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:46:50 -0700
I want to have a very high netdev_max_backlog, but that makes NAPI with the tulip driver (and 4 running ports) drop packets, I assume because by the time it polls the first 3, the 4th has been neglec
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00975.html (11,248 bytes)

14. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 08:51:46 -0400 (EDT)
Patch looks fine except for the 300 number. What are you smoking? Please retain the original value. cheers, jamal
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00981.html (12,601 bytes)

15. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 09:25:52 -0700
The original value was 300, what do you want it to be? (Check out what backlog defaults to, that is what is currently used for the budget, in 2.4.20-pre9 at least.) Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxx
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg00990.html (9,667 bytes)

16. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 20:47:19 -0400 (EDT)
Ok, i take back what i said then. Your patch is not that useful. For some reason i thought you were introducing NET_CORE_DEV_WEIGHT which happens to already exist with default value of 64. The value
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg01025.html (9,573 bytes)

17. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 18:06:13 -0700
Patch looks fine except for the 300 number. What are you smoking? Please retain the original value. The original value was 300, what do you want it to be? Ok, i take back what i said then. Your patc
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg01028.html (11,612 bytes)

18. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 21:18:40 -0400 (EDT)
The 300 is shared amongst all the drivers which have something on their rx DMA. This is done on a roundrobin fashion. Also all the drivers which are non-napi are given the same quota. I think you mis
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg01033.html (9,641 bytes)

19. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 19:37:02 -0700
I think you misunderstood. Look at the dev->weight. Yep, I was definately confused. I don't see how changing the value as I did could affect anything in a good way, but I definately saw changes in d
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg01035.html (10,257 bytes)

20. Re: [PATCH] Break 'budget' dependency on netdev_max_backlog. (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 23:21:08 -0400 (EDT)
tulip hardcodes it; net/core/dev.c::weight_p is supposed to be the general one and is proc settable via NET_CORE_DEV_WEIGHT; only problem is that is not shadowed by the devices. I am not sure if ioct
/archives/netdev/2002-10/msg01038.html (9,266 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu