From: leroy christophe <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vbordug@ru.mvista.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] net: fs_enet: Remove non NAPI RX and add NAPI for TX
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 07:23:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54361BE9.8030801@c-s.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141008.160301.394010995208640934.davem@davemloft.net>
Le 08/10/2014 22:03, David Miller a écrit :
> From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 15:04:53 +0200 (CEST)
>
>> When using a MPC8xx as a router, 'perf' shows a significant time spent in
>> fs_enet_interrupt() and fs_enet_start_xmit().
>> 'perf annotate' shows that the time spent in fs_enet_start_xmit is indeed spent
>> between spin_unlock_irqrestore() and the following instruction, hence in
>> interrupt handling. This is due to the TX complete interrupt that fires after
>> each transmitted packet.
>> This patchset first remove all non NAPI handling as NAPI has become the only
>> mode for RX, then adds NAPI for handling TX complete.
>> This improves NAT TCP throughput by 21% on MPC885 with FEC.
>>
>> Tested on MPC885 with FEC.
>>
>> [PATCH 1/2] net: fs_enet: Remove non NAPI RX
>> [PATCH 2/2] net: fs_enet: Add NAPI TX
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
> Series applied, thanks.
>
> Any particular reason you didn't just put the TX reclaim calls into
> the existing NAPI handler?
Not really. I used the gianfar.c driver as a model.
>
> That's what other drivers do, because TX reclaim can make SKBs
> available for RX packet receive on the local cpu. So generally you
> have one NAPI context that first does any pending TX reclaim, then
> polls the RX ring for new packets.
>
Is that a better approach ?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-09 5:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-07 13:04 [PATCH 0/2] net: fs_enet: Remove non NAPI RX and add NAPI for TX Christophe Leroy
2014-10-08 20:03 ` David Miller
2014-10-09 5:23 ` leroy christophe [this message]
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=54361BE9.8030801@c-s.fr \
--to=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vbordug@ru.mvista.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).