netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@broadcom.com>
To: "Jeff Garzik" <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: "David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, "netdev" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11][TG3]: Reduce spurious interrupts.
Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 18:45:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1178329558.4859.38.camel@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <463BD303.7000500@garzik.org>

On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 20:42 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Michael Chan wrote:
> > [TG3]: Reduce spurious interrupts.
> > 
> > Spurious interrupts are often encountered especially on systems
> > using the 8259 PIC mode.  This is because the I/O write to deassert
> > the interrupt is posted and won't get to the chip immediately.  As
> > a result, the IRQ may remain asserted after the IRQ handler exits,
> > causing spurious interrupts.
> > 
> > An unconditional read to flush the I/O write to force the IRQ to de-
> > assert immediately is not desirable because it impacts performance in
> > the fast path.  So we only do this after we have some indications of
> > spurious interrupts.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Chan <mchan@broadcom.com>
> 
> hmmmm, this is a bit questionable that it needs to be here.
> 
> I think it's just a fact of life that it is important to flush certain 
> writes...
> 
> I'm not sure a driver needs to be adding code to avoid the obvious 
> solution.  It would be annoying if all drivers had code to do this.

We had a discussion about 2 years ago and David decided to remove the
I/O read to improve performance.  Since then a small number of users
have been complaining about spurious interrupts.  We can add back the
unconditional read or do this detection thing which I agree is somewhat
annoying.  David, what do you think?


  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-05  0:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-05  0:55 [PATCH 10/11][TG3]: Reduce spurious interrupts Michael Chan
2007-05-05  0:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-05  1:45   ` Michael Chan [this message]
2007-05-05  2:42     ` David Miller
2007-05-05  2:50       ` Michael Chan
2007-05-05  3:47         ` David Miller
2007-05-06  0:15           ` Michael Chan
2007-05-06  0:19           ` [PATCH revised 10/11][TG3]: Eliminate " Michael Chan
2007-05-07  7:26             ` David Miller
2007-05-06  0:21           ` [PATCH revised 11/11][TG3]: Update version and reldate Michael Chan
2007-05-07  7:26             ` David Miller
2007-05-07 16:39         ` [PATCH 10/11][TG3]: Reduce spurious interrupts Rick Jones
     [not found]           ` <1178562469.4859.70.camel@dell>
2007-05-07 17:44             ` Rick Jones
2007-05-07 18:41               ` Michael Chan

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=1178329558.4859.38.camel@dell \
    --to=mchan@broadcom.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=jeff@garzik.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).