From: Bill Fink <billfink@mindspring.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: krkumar2@in.ibm.com, mchan@broadcom.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
vinay@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3]: tg3: Manage TX backlog in-driver.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:41:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080620154124.eb91fd5e.billfink@mindspring.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080620.120422.193703152.davem@davemloft.net>
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, David Miller wrote:
> From: Bill Fink <billfink@mindspring.com>
> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:52:33 -0400
>
> > I have a general question about this new tx queueing model, which
> > I haven't seen discussed to this point.
> >
> > Although hopefully not frequent events, if the tx queue is kept in
> > the driver rather than the network midlayer, what are the ramifications
> > of a routing change which requires changing the output to a new interface,
> > considering for example that on our 10-GigE interfaces we typically set
> > txqueuelen to 10000.
>
> All of the packets would have been in the existing mid-layer generic
> backlog anyways, way past the routing decisions. Nothing about
> behavior in this area would be changing.
Great. I wasn't aware the mid-layer generic backlog was after the
routing decisions. Thanks for educating me (and others). I learn
new things about the Linux network stack all the time, plus it's
always changing, so can be a challenge to keep up with it if you're
not a full-time developer.
> > Similarly, what are the ramifications of such a change to the bonding
> > driver (either in a load balancing or active/backup scenario) when one
> > of the interfaces fails (again hopefully a rare event).
>
> Since the bonding driver acts like a pass-thru, and because of the
> above, I expect no real ramifications in this area as well.
Also good to know.
-Thanks
-Bill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-20 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-19 11:10 [PATCH 3/3]: tg3: Manage TX backlog in-driver David Miller
2008-06-20 10:48 ` Krishna Kumar2
2008-06-20 18:52 ` Bill Fink
2008-06-20 19:04 ` David Miller
2008-06-20 19:41 ` Bill Fink [this message]
2008-06-20 23:20 ` David Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-06-20 23:17 David Miller
2008-06-21 17:02 ` Michael Chan
2008-06-22 23:49 ` David Miller
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=20080620154124.eb91fd5e.billfink@mindspring.com \
--to=billfink@mindspring.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=krkumar2@in.ibm.com \
--cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vinay@linux.vnet.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.