From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:13:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:13:16 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:64273 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:13:06 -0500 Message-ID: <3C69771E.17F26646@zip.com.au> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 12:12:14 -0800 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18-pre9 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Larson CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tsbogend@alpha.franken.de Subject: Re: Is this a bug in TCP or the PCNet32 driver? In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dave Larson wrote: > > The way things are today, the TCP code rely on the hardware drivers to > free an skb as soon as it is transmitted. But in that case of PCNet32, > that doesn't happen. On the other hand, PCNet32 does seem reasonable in > it's attempts to reduce the number of interrupts, although that breaks the > tcp code in this case were these isn't much network activity. > Yup. Tx interrupt mitigation like this is a really neat feature. It can make a huge improvement in performance. But the driver does need to implement a timer to fix the problem which you have described. -