From: James Chapman <jchapman@katalix.com>
To: Mandeep Singh Baines <mandeep.baines@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, hadi@cyberus.ca, davem@davemloft.net,
jeff@garzik.org, ossthema@de.ibm.com,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: possible NAPI improvements to reduce interrupt rates for low traffic rates
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:33:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46E50F6E.5010503@katalix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070908164222.GB3765@ludhiana>
Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>> Why would using a timer to hold off the napi_complete() rather than
>> jiffy count limit the polls per packet to 2?
>>
> I was thinking a timer could be used in the way suggested in Jamal's
> paper. The driver would do nothing (park) until the timer expires. So
> there would be no calls to poll for the duration of the timer. Hence,
> this approach would add extra latency not present in a jiffy polling
> approach.
Ah, ok. I wasn't planning to test timer-driven polling. :)
>> Why wouldn't it be efficient? It would usually be done by reading an
>> "interrupt pending" register.
>>
> Reading the "interrupt pending" register would require an MMIO read.
> MMIO reads are very expensive. In some systems the latency of an MMIO
> read can be 1000x that of an L1 cache access.
Agreed. Testing for any work being available should be as efficient as
possible and would be driver specific.
--
James Chapman
Katalix Systems Ltd
http://www.katalix.com
Catalysts for your Embedded Linux software development
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-10 9:33 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
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 [this message]
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=46E50F6E.5010503@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@osdl.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.