Re: [net-next 03/10] ixgbe: Drop the TX work limit and instead just leave it to budget

[Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>]

On Mon, 2011-08-22 at 09:30 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On 08/21/2011 07:01 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2011-08-21 at 00:29 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> >> From: Alexander Duyck<alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
> I wasn't aware there was a recommended approach.  Could you tell me more 
> about it?

If a whole TX ring is cleaned then consider the budget spent; otherwise
don't count it.

Ben.

> As I stated in the patch description this approach works very well for 
> me, especially in routing workloads since it typically keeps the TX 
> clean-up in polling as long as the RX is in polling.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alex

-- 
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.