From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
Cc: gnb@sgi.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, ak@muc.de, akepner@sgi.com,
jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, netdev@oss.sgi.com, davem@redhat.com
Subject: Re: NAPI, e100, and system performance problem
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:43:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050422164301.724343f6.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050423094038.72a8da73@localhost.localdomain>
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 09:40:38 +1000
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org> wrote:
> My experience is that NAPI adds latency and that can cause worse performance.
> I haven't seen a good analysis of the problem and/or simple tests to reproduce
> the problem
Right, and it's cpu and bus speed dependant as to when you hit
this bad case. If your packet rate is perfectly such that
only 1 or 2 packets get processed per interrupt then NAPI loses
badly due to the extra PIO overhead entailed from enabling and
disabling interrupts.
This is essential and well understood, and I personally don't need
to see "numbers" to acknowledge this flaw.
I hope that minimal mitigation settings alleviate this problem for
the most part.
When I moved tg3 over to NAPI, the happiest part of that was deleting
the dynamic hw mitigation setting code the tg3 driver had. If ever
that kind of thing goes back into the drivers, it should be based
upon a common feedback variable (something based upon dev->weight
perhaps), not reimplemented N times, once in every driver.
With the dynamic schemes comes a new issue, how quickly to respond
to changes in traffic patterns.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-22 23:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-18 6:11 NAPI, e100, and system performance problem Brandeburg, Jesse
2005-04-18 12:14 ` jamal
2005-04-18 15:36 ` Robert Olsson
2005-04-18 16:55 ` Arthur Kepner
2005-04-18 19:34 ` Robert Olsson
2005-04-18 20:26 ` jamal
2005-04-19 5:55 ` Greg Banks
2005-04-19 18:36 ` David S. Miller
2005-04-19 20:38 ` NAPI and CPU utilization [was: NAPI, e100, and system performance problem] Arthur Kepner
2005-04-19 20:52 ` Rick Jones
2005-04-19 21:09 ` David S. Miller
[not found] ` <20050420145629.GH19415@sgi.com>
2005-04-20 15:15 ` NAPI, e100, and system performance problem jamal
2005-04-22 11:36 ` Andi Kleen
2005-04-22 12:33 ` jamal
2005-04-22 17:21 ` Andi Kleen
2005-04-22 18:18 ` jamal
2005-04-22 18:30 ` Andi Kleen
2005-04-22 18:37 ` Arthur Kepner
2005-04-22 18:52 ` David S. Miller
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504241845070.2934@linux.site>
2005-04-25 11:25 ` jamal
2005-04-25 18:51 ` David S. Miller
2005-04-25 11:41 ` jamal
2005-04-25 12:16 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2005-04-22 19:01 ` jamal
2005-04-22 19:07 ` David S. Miller
2005-04-22 19:21 ` jamal
2005-04-23 20:50 ` Robert Olsson
2005-04-23 16:56 ` Robert Olsson
2005-04-22 23:28 ` Greg Banks
2005-04-22 23:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-04-22 23:43 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2005-04-23 2:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-04-23 17:54 ` Robert Olsson
2005-04-23 3:04 ` jamal
2005-04-23 17:14 ` Robert Olsson
2005-04-22 14:52 ` Robert Olsson
2005-04-22 15:37 ` jamal
2005-04-22 17:22 ` Andi Kleen
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=20050422164301.724343f6.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=akepner@sgi.com \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=gnb@sgi.com \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=shemminger@osdl.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).