From: Eric Lemoine <eric.lemoine@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
Cc: hadi@znyx.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] netif_rx: receive path optimization
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:43:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5cac192f05033113434742aeb4@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050331131707.69f451ea@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net>
> > > Here is another alternative that seems better than the earlier posting. It uses
> > > a per device receive queue for non-NAPI devices. The only issue is that then
> > > we lose the per-cpu queue's and that could impact the loopback device performance.
> > > If that is really an issue, then the per-cpu magic should be moved to the loopback
> > > device.
> > >
> >
> > The repurcassions of going from per-CPU-for-all-devices queue
> > (introduced by softnet) to per-device-for-all-CPUs maybe huge in my
> > opinion especially in SMP. A closer view of whats there now maybe
> > per-device-per-CPU backlog queue.
>
> Any real hardware only has a single receive packet source (the interrupt routine),
> and the only collision would be in the case of interrupt migration. So having
> per-device-per-CPU queue's would be overkill and more complex because
> the NAPI scheduling is per-netdevice rather than per-queue (though that
> could be fixed).
>
> > I think performance will be impacted in all devices. imo, whatever needs
> > to go in needs to have some experimental data to back it
>
> Experiment with what? Proving an absolute negative is impossible.
> I will test loopback and non-NAPI version of a couple of gigabit drivers
> to see.
Just a naive question : why at all trying to accelerate netif_rx?
Isn't NAPI the best choice for high performance rx anyway?
--
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-31 21:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-30 21:28 [PATCH] netif_rx: receive path optimization Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-30 21:57 ` jamal
2005-03-30 22:08 ` jamal
2005-03-30 23:53 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-31 3:16 ` jamal
2005-03-31 20:04 ` [RFC] " Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-31 21:10 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2005-03-31 21:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-31 21:25 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2005-03-31 21:43 ` Eric Lemoine [this message]
2005-03-31 22:02 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-03-31 21:24 ` Rick Jones
2005-03-31 21:38 ` jamal
2005-03-31 22:42 ` Rick Jones
2005-03-31 23:03 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2005-03-31 23:28 ` Rick Jones
2005-04-01 0:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-04-01 0:42 ` Rick Jones
2005-04-01 0:30 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2005-03-31 23:36 ` jamal
2005-04-01 0:07 ` Rick Jones
2005-04-01 1:17 ` jamal
2005-04-01 18:22 ` Rick Jones
2005-04-01 16:40 ` Andi Kleen
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=5cac192f05033113434742aeb4@mail.gmail.com \
--to=eric.lemoine@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hadi@znyx.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.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.