From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: [net-next 03/10] ixgbe: Drop the TX work limit and instead just leave it to budget Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:01:44 +0100 Message-ID: <1313935304.3142.22.camel@deadeye> References: <1313911761-11709-1-git-send-email-jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> <1313911761-11709-4-git-send-email-jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, Alexander Duyck , netdev@vger.kernel.org, gospo@redhat.com To: Jeff Kirsher Return-path: Received: from mail.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220]:23443 "EHLO exchange.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752365Ab1HUOBt (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2011 10:01:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1313911761-11709-4-git-send-email-jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, 2011-08-21 at 00:29 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote: > From: Alexander Duyck > > This change makes it so that the TX work limit is now obsolete. Instead of > using it we can instead rely on the NAPI budget for the number of packets > we should clean per interrupt. The advantage to this approach is that it > results in a much more balanced work flow since the same number of RX and > TX packets should be cleaned per interrupts. [...] This seems kind of sensible, but it's not how Dave has been recommending people to account for TX work in NAPI. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.