netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 10:34:23 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.30.0110021739160.2323-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, jamal wrote:

> [...] please have the courtesy of at least posting results/numbers of
> how this improved things and under what workloads and conditions.
> [...]

500 MHz PIII UP server, 433 MHz client over a single 100 mbit ethernet
using Simon Kirby's udpspam tool to overload the server. Result: 2.4.10
locks up before the patch. 2.4.10 with the first generation irqrate patch
applied protects against the lockup (if max_rate is correct), but results
in dropped packets. The auto-tuning+polling patch results in a working
system and working network, no lockup and no dropped packets. Why this
happened and how it happened has been discussed extensively.

(the effect of polling-driven networking is just an extra and unintended
bonus side-effect.)

        Ingo


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>