Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[patch\]\s+forcedeth\:\s+add\s+support\s+for\s+interrupt\s+mitigation\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[patch\]\s+forcedeth\:\s+add\s+support\s+for\s+interrupt\s+mitigation\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 20:13:57 +0200; The current forcedeth driver doesn't support interrupt mitigation, this can result in an incredible number of interrupts/sec for gigabit links. The attached patch adds a throughput mode that enables; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00026.html (20,296 bytes)
2. Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:29:08 +0200; Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> : Naīve question: what about the NAPI way ? -- Ueimo; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00027.html (8,499 bytes)
3. Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: "John W. Linville" <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:42:53 -0400; I was thinking the same thing...although it appears forcedeth already supports NAPI... What does this offer over the NAPI support? John -- John W. Linville linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00028.html (9,503 bytes)
4. Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:07:13 -0400; FWIW the ideal is to implement both NAPI -and- hardware interrupt Jeff; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00029.html (8,616 bytes)
5. RE: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: "Ayaz Abdulla" <AAbdulla@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:10:51 -0700; Yes, thats right. I just gave Manfred the hardware interrupt mitigation patch (v46). Next, I will implement NAPI. FWIW the ideal is to implement both NAPI -and- hardware interrupt mitigation. Jeff; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00030.html (8,718 bytes)
6. Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:33:14 -0400; The current forcedeth driver doesn't support interrupt mitigation, this can result in an incredible number of interrupts/sec for gigabit links. The attached patch adds a throughput mode that enables; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00034.html (11,686 bytes)
7. [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 20:13:57 +0200; Hi, The current forcedeth driver doesn't support interrupt mitigation, this can result in an incredible number of interrupts/sec for gigabit links. The attached patch adds a throughput mode that enab; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00084.html (20,311 bytes)
8. Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:29:08 +0200; Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> : Naīve question: what about the NAPI way ? -- Ueimor; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00085.html (8,543 bytes)
9. Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: "John W. Linville" <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:42:53 -0400; I was thinking the same thing...although it appears forcedeth already supports NAPI... What does this offer over the NAPI support? John -- John W. Linville linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00086.html (9,585 bytes)
10. Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:07:13 -0400; FWIW the ideal is to implement both NAPI -and- hardware interrupt mitigation. Jeff; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00087.html (8,654 bytes)
11. RE: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: "Ayaz Abdulla" <AAbdulla@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:10:51 -0700; Yes, thats right. I just gave Manfred the hardware interrupt mitigation patch (v46). Next, I will implement NAPI. FWIW the ideal is to implement both NAPI -and- hardware interrupt mitigation. Jeff; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00088.html (8,733 bytes)
12. Re: [patch] forcedeth: add support for interrupt mitigation (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:33:14 -0400; The current forcedeth driver doesn't support interrupt mitigation, this can result in an incredible number of interrupts/sec for gigabit links. The attached patch adds a throughput mode that enables; /archives/netdev/2005-10/msg00092.html (12,028 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]