From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Ayaz Abdulla <aabdulla@nvidia.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 11:08:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071007090808.GB733@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071006151250.GA17020@havoc.gtf.org>
* Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
> * I feel TX NAPI is a useful tool, because it provides an independent TX
> process control point and system load feedback point.
> Thus I felt this was slightly superior to tasklets.
/me agrees violently
btw., when i played with this tunable under -rt:
enum {
NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT,
NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_CPU
};
static int optimization_mode = NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT;
the MODE_CPU one gave (much) _higher_ bandwidth. The queueing model in
forcedeth seemed to be not that robust and i think a single queueing
model should be adopted instead of this tunable. (which i think just hid
some bug/dependency) But i never got to the bottom of it so it's just
the impression i got.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-07 9:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-06 15:12 [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing Jeff Garzik
2007-10-06 15:13 ` [PATCH 1/5] forcedeth: make NAPI unconditional Jeff Garzik
2007-10-06 15:14 ` [PATCH 2/5] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 4:43 ` Yinghai Lu
2007-10-07 11:40 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 19:36 ` Yinghai Lu
2007-10-07 20:07 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 9:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-10-06 15:14 ` [PATCH 3/5] forcedeth: process TX completions using NAPI Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 14:39 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-06 15:14 ` [PATCH 4/5] forcedeth: internal simplification and cleanups Jeff Garzik
2007-10-06 15:15 ` [PATCH 5/5] forcedeth: timer overhaul Jeff Garzik
2007-10-06 15:17 ` [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing Jeff Garzik
2007-10-06 15:24 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 9:08 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-10-07 11:34 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 11:23 ` [PATCH 6/n] forcedeth: protect slow path with mutex Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 14:40 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 14:47 ` [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing Jeff Garzik
2007-10-07 19:39 ` Yinghai Lu
2007-10-07 20:05 ` Jeff Garzik
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=20071007090808.GB733@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=aabdulla@nvidia.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@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