From: Jon Mason <jdmason@us.ibm.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
Cc: "Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@intel.com>,
hadi@cyberus.ca, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Williams, Mitch A" <mitch.a.williams@intel.com>,
netdev@oss.sgi.com, Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se, "Venkatesan,
Ganesh" <ganesh.venkatesan@intel.com>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 16:51:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200506021651.49013.jdmason@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050602143126.7c302cfd@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net>
On Thursday 02 June 2005 04:31 pm, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
<...>
> For networking the problem is worse, the "right" choice depends on workload
> and relationship between components in the system. I can't see how you
> could ever expect a driver specific solution.
I think there is a way for a generic driver NAPI enhancement. That is to
modify the weight dependent on link speed.
Here is the problem as I see it, NAPI enablement for slow media speeds causes
unneeded strain on the system. This is because of the "weight" of NAPI.
Lets look at e1000 as an example. Currently the NAPI weight is 64,
regardless of link media speed. This weight is probably fine for a gigabit
link, but for 10/100 this is way to large. Thus causing interrupts to be
enabled/disabled after every poll/interrupt. Lots of overhead, and not very
smart. Why not have the driver set the weight to 16/32 respectively for the
weight (or better yet, have someone run numbers to find weight that are
closer to what the adapter can actually use)? While these numbers may not be
optimal for every system, this is much better that the current system, and
would only require 5 or so extra lines of code per NAPI enabled driver.
For those who want to have an optimal weight for their tuned system, let them
use the /proc entry that is being proposed.
Thanks,
Jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-02 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 121+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-02 21:19 RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch Ronciak, John
2005-06-02 21:31 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-06-02 21:40 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-02 21:51 ` Jon Mason [this message]
2005-06-02 22:12 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-02 22:19 ` Jon Mason
2005-06-02 22:15 ` Robert Olsson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-06-07 16:23 Ronciak, John
2005-06-07 20:21 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-08 2:20 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-06-08 3:31 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-08 3:43 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-08 13:36 ` jamal
2005-06-09 21:37 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-06-09 22:05 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-06-09 22:12 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-06-09 22:21 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-09 22:21 ` jamal
2005-06-09 22:22 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-09 22:20 ` jamal
2005-06-06 20:29 Ronciak, John
2005-06-06 23:55 ` Mitch Williams
2005-06-07 0:08 ` Ben Greear
2005-06-08 1:50 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-06-07 4:53 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-06-07 12:38 ` jamal
2005-06-07 12:06 ` Martin Josefsson
2005-06-07 13:29 ` jamal
2005-06-07 12:36 ` Martin Josefsson
2005-06-07 16:34 ` Robert Olsson
2005-06-07 23:19 ` Rick Jones
2005-06-21 20:37 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 7:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2005-06-22 8:42 ` P
2005-06-22 19:37 ` jamal
2005-06-23 8:56 ` P
2005-06-21 20:20 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-21 20:38 ` Rick Jones
2005-06-21 20:55 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-21 21:47 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-21 22:22 ` Donald Becker
2005-06-21 22:34 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 0:08 ` Donald Becker
2005-06-22 4:44 ` Chris Friesen
2005-06-22 11:31 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 16:23 ` Leonid Grossman
2005-06-22 16:37 ` jamal
2005-06-22 18:00 ` Leonid Grossman
2005-06-22 18:06 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 20:22 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 20:35 ` Rick Jones
2005-06-22 20:43 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 21:10 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 21:16 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 21:53 ` Chris Friesen
2005-06-22 22:11 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 21:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2005-06-22 22:13 ` Eric Dumazet
2005-06-22 22:30 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 22:23 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-23 12:14 ` jamal
2005-06-23 17:36 ` David Mosberger
2005-06-22 22:42 ` Leonid Grossman
2005-06-22 23:13 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 23:19 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 23:23 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 17:05 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-06 15:35 Ronciak, John
2005-06-06 19:47 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 18:19 Ronciak, John
2005-06-03 18:33 ` Ben Greear
2005-06-03 18:49 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 18:59 ` Ben Greear
2005-06-03 19:02 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 20:17 ` Robert Olsson
2005-06-03 20:30 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 17:40 Ronciak, John
2005-06-03 18:08 ` Robert Olsson
2005-06-03 0:11 Ronciak, John
2005-06-03 0:18 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 2:32 ` jamal
2005-06-03 17:43 ` Mitch Williams
2005-06-03 18:38 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 18:42 ` jamal
2005-06-03 19:01 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 19:28 ` Mitch Williams
2005-06-03 19:59 ` jamal
2005-06-03 20:31 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 21:12 ` Jon Mason
2005-06-03 20:22 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 20:29 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 19:49 ` Michael Chan
2005-06-03 20:59 ` Lennert Buytenhek
2005-06-03 20:35 ` Michael Chan
2005-06-03 22:29 ` jamal
2005-06-04 0:25 ` Michael Chan
2005-06-05 21:36 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-06 6:43 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 23:26 ` Lennert Buytenhek
2005-06-05 20:11 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 21:07 ` Edgar E Iglesias
2005-06-03 23:30 ` Lennert Buytenhek
2005-06-03 20:30 ` Ben Greear
2005-06-03 19:40 ` jamal
2005-06-03 20:23 ` jamal
2005-06-03 20:28 ` Mitch Williams
2005-05-26 21:36 Mitch Williams
2005-05-27 8:21 ` Robert Olsson
2005-05-27 11:18 ` jamal
2005-05-27 15:50 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-05-27 20:27 ` Mitch Williams
2005-05-27 21:01 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-05-28 0:56 ` jamal
2005-05-31 17:35 ` Mitch Williams
2005-05-31 17:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-05-31 17:43 ` Mitch Williams
2005-05-31 22:07 ` Jon Mason
2005-05-31 22:14 ` David S. Miller
2005-05-31 23:28 ` Jon Mason
2005-06-02 12:26 ` jamal
2005-06-02 17:30 ` Stephen Hemminger
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=200506021651.49013.jdmason@us.ibm.com \
--to=jdmason@us.ibm.com \
--cc=Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ganesh.venkatesan@intel.com \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
--cc=mitch.a.williams@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).