netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mitch Williams <mitch.a.williams@intel.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
	"Kok, Auke-jan H" <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
	"Garzik, Jeff" <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Brandeburg,
	Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
	"Kok, Auke" <auke@foo-projects.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] e1000: fix netpoll with NAPI
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:42:14 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1150130534.2879.9.camel@strongmad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060612001356.GA5112@localhost.localdomain>

On Sun, 2006-06-11 at 17:13 -0700, Neil Horman wrote:
> Any further thoughts on this guys?  I still think my last solution
> solves all of
> the netpoll problems, and isn't going to have any noticable impact on
> performance.
> 
I haven't had time to evaluate performance on your patch (sorry!), but
after thinking about it, I agree that it should not have any noticeable
impact.  OTOH, performance tuning is a funny thing, and things you think
won't cause problems often do.

Anyway, I'm still not quite ready to ACK this because it's just not
future-proof.  Eventually, we will need to support multiple RX queues,
and this solution will not work in that situation.

A simpler short-term solution is just to schedule our NAPI polling on
the "real" netdev instead of our polling netdev.  This is a trivial
change and works correctly with a single queue.  But, like your patch,
it isn't future-proof.

So, I'm still thinking and pondering on this one.

If we get a patch in to fix the recursive loop in netpoll, my original
patch will work, right?  Or is there still another issue?

-Mitch

  reply	other threads:[~2006-06-12 16:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-06-05 23:09 [PATCH 0/2] e1000: fixes for netpoll+NAPI, ARM Kok, Auke
2006-06-05 23:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] e1000: fix netpoll with NAPI Kok, Auke
2006-06-06 13:52   ` Neil Horman
2006-06-06 16:39     ` Mitch Williams
2006-06-06 17:05       ` Neil Horman
2006-06-06 17:18         ` Auke Kok
2006-06-06 17:30           ` Jeff Moyer
2006-06-06 17:34             ` Auke Kok
2006-06-06 17:42               ` Jeff Moyer
2006-06-06 23:17                 ` Matt Mackall
2006-06-07 15:05                   ` Neil Horman
2006-06-07 16:48                     ` Matt Mackall
2006-06-07 18:25                       ` Auke Kok
2006-06-07 18:44                         ` Jeff Moyer
2006-06-07 19:18                           ` Neil Horman
2006-06-08 17:19                           ` Mitch Williams
2006-06-08 17:29                             ` Jeff Moyer
2006-06-12  0:13                               ` Neil Horman
2006-06-12 16:42                                 ` Mitch Williams [this message]
2006-06-12 18:06                                   ` Neil Horman
2006-06-14 20:41                                     ` Neil Horman
2006-06-14 23:44                                       ` Mitch Williams
2006-06-15 12:44                                         ` John W. Linville
2006-06-15 20:45                                           ` Mitch Williams
2006-06-20  8:28                                             ` Andrew Grover
2006-06-07 18:54                         ` John W. Linville
2006-06-08 17:23                           ` Mitch Williams
2006-06-08 18:39                             ` John W. Linville
2006-06-06 17:29       ` Jeff Moyer
2006-06-05 23:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] e1000: remove risky prefetch on next_skb->data Kok, Auke
2006-06-05 23:21   ` Rick Jones
2006-06-06  0:12     ` Brandeburg, Jesse
2006-06-06  0:16       ` Rick Jones
2006-06-06  0:22         ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-06  0:26         ` Brandeburg, Jesse

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=1150130534.2879.9.camel@strongmad \
    --to=mitch.a.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com \
    --cc=auke@foo-projects.org \
    --cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
    --cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpm@selenic.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.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).