Re: RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface

Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29T08:43:29Z

On Wednesday 29 August 2007 10:15, James Chapman wrote:
> Jan-Bernd Themann wrote:
> > What I'm trying to improve with this approach is interrupt
> > mitigation for NICs where the hardware support for interrupt
> > mitigation is limited. I'm not trying to improve this for NICs
> > that work well with the means their HW provides. I'm aware of
> > the fact that this scheme has it's tradeoffs and certainly
> > can not be as good as a HW approach.
> > So I'm grateful for any ideas that do have less tradeoffs and
> > provide a mechanism to reduce interrupts without depending on
> > HW support of the NIC.
> >
> > In the end I want to reduce the CPU utilization. And one way
> > to do that is LRO which also works only well if there are more
> > then just a very few packets to aggregate. So at least our
> > driver (eHEA) would benefit from a mix of timer based polling
> > and plain NAPI (depending on load situations).
>
> Wouldn't you achieve the same result by enabling hardware interrupt
> mitigation in eHEA in combination with NAPI? Presumably a 10G interface
> has hardware mitigation features?

Quote from above: "What I'm trying to improve with this approach
is interrupt mitigation for NICs where the hardware support for
interrupt mitigation is limited"

So guess why I'm doing that ;-)

>
> > If there is no need for a generic mechanism for this kind of
> > network adapters, then we can just leave this to each device
> > driver.
>
> I've been looking at this from a different angle. My goal is to optimize
> NAPI packet forwarding rates while minimizing packet latency. Using
> hardware interrupt mitigation hurts latency so I'm investigating ways to
> turn it off without risking NAPI poll on/off thrashing at certain packet
> rates.
>
> Jan-Bernd, I think I've found a solution to the issue that you
> highlighted with my scheme yesterday and it doesn't involve generating
> other interrupts using hrtimers etc. :) Initial results are very
> encouraging in my setups. Would you be willing to test it with eHEA? I
> don't have a 10G setup. If results are encouraging, I'll post an RFC to
> ask for review / feedback from the NAPI experts here. What do you think?
>

I'm not sure which solution you mean. If you post your RFC, please create
a new thread (other title)