From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: kus Kusche Klaus <kus@keba.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: My vote against eepro* removal
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 02:24:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1137655489.4736.33.camel@mindpipe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AAD6DA242BC63C488511C611BD51F367323320@MAILIT.keba.co.at>
On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 08:19 +0100, kus Kusche Klaus wrote:
> Last time I tested (around 2.6.12), eepro100 worked much better
> in -rt kernels w.r.t. latencies than e100:
>
> e100 caused a periodic latency of about 500 microseconds
> exactly every 2 seconds, no matter what the load on the interface
> was (i.e. even on an idle interface).
>
> eepro100 did not show any latencies that long, it worked much
> smoother w.r.t. latencies.
>
> Of course I would prefer to have e100 fixed over keeping eepro100
> around forever, but the last time I checked, it still wasn't fixed.
Please provide latency traces to illustrate the problematic code path.
It sounds like you have known about this issue for a while, were you
waiting for it to fix itself?
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-19 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-19 7:19 My vote against eepro* removal kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 7:24 ` Lee Revell [this message]
2006-01-19 7:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-01-19 10:08 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 10:26 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 16:20 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-01-19 17:16 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-19 19:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-19 22:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-20 9:37 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 9:55 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-21 0:40 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 1:19 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-21 1:30 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 2:01 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-21 3:56 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-20 10:19 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 11:02 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-21 0:45 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-20 10:51 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 11:05 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-20 11:27 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-23 11:01 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-23 20:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-01-24 7:38 kus Kusche Klaus
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=1137655489.4736.33.camel@mindpipe \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=kus@keba.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox