From: akepner@sgi.com
To: Jan-Bernd Themann <ossthema@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Klein <tklein@de.ibm.com>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <themann@de.ibm.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ppc <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
Marcus Eder <meder@de.ibm.com>,
Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 08:37:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070824153703.GN5592@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200708241559.17055.ossthema@de.ibm.com>
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:59:16PM +0200, Jan-Bernd Themann wrote:
> .......
> 3) On modern systems the incoming packets are processed very fast. Especially
> on SMP systems when we use multiple queues we process only a few packets
> per napi poll cycle. So NAPI does not work very well here and the interrupt
> rate is still high. What we need would be some sort of timer polling mode
> which will schedule a device after a certain amount of time for high load
> situations. With high precision timers this could work well. Current
> usual timers are too slow. A finer granularity would be needed to keep the
> latency down (and queue length moderate).
>
We found the same on ia64-sn systems with tg3 a couple of years
ago. Using simple interrupt coalescing ("don't interrupt until
you've received N packets or M usecs have elapsed") worked
reasonably well in practice. If your h/w supports that (and I'd
guess it does, since it's such a simple thing), you might try
it.
--
Arthur
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: akepner@sgi.com
To: Jan-Bernd Themann <ossthema@de.ibm.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <themann@de.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ppc <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Marcus Eder <meder@de.ibm.com>, Thomas Klein <tklein@de.ibm.com>,
Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 08:37:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070824153703.GN5592@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200708241559.17055.ossthema@de.ibm.com>
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:59:16PM +0200, Jan-Bernd Themann wrote:
> .......
> 3) On modern systems the incoming packets are processed very fast. Especially
> on SMP systems when we use multiple queues we process only a few packets
> per napi poll cycle. So NAPI does not work very well here and the interrupt
> rate is still high. What we need would be some sort of timer polling mode
> which will schedule a device after a certain amount of time for high load
> situations. With high precision timers this could work well. Current
> usual timers are too slow. A finer granularity would be needed to keep the
> latency down (and queue length moderate).
>
We found the same on ia64-sn systems with tg3 a couple of years
ago. Using simple interrupt coalescing ("don't interrupt until
you've received N packets or M usecs have elapsed") worked
reasonably well in practice. If your h/w supports that (and I'd
guess it does, since it's such a simple thing), you might try
it.
--
Arthur
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-24 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 94+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-24 13:59 RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 13:59 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 15:37 ` akepner [this message]
2007-08-24 15:37 ` akepner
2007-08-24 15:47 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 15:47 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 15:52 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-08-24 15:52 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-08-24 16:50 ` David Stevens
2007-08-24 16:50 ` David Stevens
2007-08-24 21:44 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:44 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:51 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 21:51 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 16:51 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 16:51 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 17:07 ` Rick Jones
2007-08-24 17:07 ` Rick Jones
2007-08-24 17:45 ` Shirley Ma
2007-08-24 17:45 ` Shirley Ma
2007-08-24 17:16 ` James Chapman
2007-08-24 17:16 ` James Chapman
2007-08-24 18:11 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 18:11 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 21:47 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:47 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 22:06 ` akepner
2007-08-24 22:06 ` akepner
2007-08-26 19:36 ` James Chapman
2007-08-26 19:36 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 1:58 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 1:58 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 9:47 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 9:47 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 20:37 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 20:37 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 11:19 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 11:19 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 20:21 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 20:21 ` David Miller
2007-08-29 7:10 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 7:10 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 8:15 ` James Chapman
2007-08-29 8:15 ` James Chapman
2007-08-29 8:43 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 8:43 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 8:29 ` David Miller
2007-08-29 8:29 ` David Miller
2007-08-29 8:31 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 8:31 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 15:51 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 15:51 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 16:02 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 16:02 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 17:05 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 17:05 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 21:02 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 21:02 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 21:41 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 21:41 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 21:56 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 21:56 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 9:22 ` James Chapman
2007-08-28 9:22 ` James Chapman
2007-08-28 11:48 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 11:48 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 12:16 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-08-28 12:16 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-08-28 14:55 ` James Chapman
2007-08-28 14:55 ` James Chapman
2007-08-28 11:21 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 11:21 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 20:25 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 20:25 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 20:27 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 20:27 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 16:45 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 16:45 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 21:43 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:43 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:32 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:32 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:37 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:37 ` David Miller
[not found] <8VHRR-45R-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <8VKwj-8ke-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
2007-08-24 19:04 ` Bodo Eggert
2007-08-24 19:04 ` Bodo Eggert
2007-08-24 20:42 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 20:42 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 21:11 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 21:11 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 21:35 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 21:35 ` Linas Vepstas
[not found] ` <E1IOeSm-0000bm-Jo__24045.532072387$1187982363$gmane$org@be1.lrz>
2007-08-24 20:24 ` Stephen Hemminger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-08-25 2:10 Mitchell Erblich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070824153703.GN5592@sgi.com \
--to=akepner@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=meder@de.ibm.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ossthema@de.ibm.com \
--cc=raisch@de.ibm.com \
--cc=stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com \
--cc=themann@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tklein@de.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.