| To: | mingo@xxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 |
| From: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Date: | Wed, 3 Oct 2001 20:53:58 +0400 (MSK DST) |
| Cc: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx, bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.33.0110031702280.7221-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> from "Ingo Molnar" at Oct 3, 1 05:28:08 pm |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hello! > In a generic computing environment i want to spend cycles doing useful > work, not polling. Ingo, "polling" is wrong name. It does not poll. :-) Actually, this misnomer is the worst thing whic I worried about. Citing my old explanation: >"Polling" is not a real polling in fact, it just accepts irqs as >events waking rx softirq with blocking subsequent irqs. >Actual receive happens at softirq. > >Seems, this approach solves the worst half of livelock problem completely: >irqs are throttled and tuned to load automatically. >Well, and drivers become cleaner. Alexey |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch] auto-limiting IRQ load take #2, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-F4, Rik van Riel |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, Ingo Molnar |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, Andrea Arcangeli |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, Ingo Molnar |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |