From: James Chapman <jchapman@katalix.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, hadi@cyberus.ca, davem@davemloft.net,
jeff@garzik.org, mandeep.baines@gmail.com, ossthema@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: RFC: possible NAPI improvements to reduce interrupt rates for low traffic rates
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:30:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46E01D16.5000609@katalix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070906153700.57a0c448@oldman>
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> What about the latency that NAPI imposes? Right now there are certain applications that
> don't like NAPI because it add several more microseconds, and this may make it worse.
Latency is something that I think this approach will actually improve,
at the expense of additional polling. Or is it the ksoftirqd scheduling
latency that you are referring to?
> Maybe a per-device flag or tuning parameters (like weight sysfs value)? or some other
> way to set low-latency values.
Yes. I'd like to think good defaults could be derived though, perhaps
based on settings like CONFIG_PREEMPT, CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMER, CONFIG_HZ
and maybe even bogomips / nr_cpus.
--
James Chapman
Katalix Systems Ltd
http://www.katalix.com
Catalysts for your Embedded Linux software development
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-06 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-06 14:16 RFC: possible NAPI improvements to reduce interrupt rates for low traffic rates James Chapman
2007-09-06 14:37 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-09-06 15:30 ` James Chapman [this message]
2007-09-06 15:37 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-09-06 16:07 ` James Chapman
2007-09-06 23:06 ` jamal
2007-09-07 9:31 ` James Chapman
2007-09-07 13:22 ` jamal
2007-09-10 9:20 ` James Chapman
2007-09-10 12:27 ` jamal
2007-09-12 7:04 ` Bill Fink
2007-09-12 12:12 ` jamal
2007-09-12 13:50 ` James Chapman
2007-09-12 14:02 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-09-12 16:26 ` James Chapman
2007-09-12 16:47 ` Mandeep Baines
2007-09-13 6:57 ` David Miller
2007-09-14 13:14 ` jamal
2007-09-07 21:20 ` Jason Lunz
2007-09-10 9:25 ` James Chapman
2007-09-07 3:55 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2007-09-07 9:38 ` James Chapman
2007-09-08 16:42 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2007-09-10 9:33 ` James Chapman
2007-09-10 12:12 ` jamal
2007-09-08 16:32 ` Andi Kleen
2007-09-10 9:25 ` James Chapman
2007-09-12 15:12 ` David Miller
2007-09-12 16:39 ` James Chapman
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=46E01D16.5000609@katalix.com \
--to=jchapman@katalix.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=mandeep.baines@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ossthema@de.ibm.com \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
/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.