From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linas@austin.ibm.com (Linas Vepstas) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2]: powerpc/cell spidernet bottom half Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:30:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20060816233028.GO20551@austin.ibm.com> References: <44E38157.4070805@garzik.org> <200608162324.47235.arnd@arndb.de> <20060816.143203.11626235.davem@davemloft.net> <200608170016.47072.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, akpm@osdl.org, jeff@garzik.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jklewis@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens.Osterkamp@de.ibm.com, David Miller Return-path: Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.154]:20929 "EHLO e36.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750959AbWHPXaw (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:30:52 -0400 To: Arnd Bergmann Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200608170016.47072.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 12:16:46AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Am Wednesday 16 August 2006 23:32 schrieb David Miller: > > Can spidernet be told these kinds of parameters? =A0"N packets or > > X usecs"? >=20 > It can not do exactly this but probably we can get close to it by Why would you want o do this? It seems like a cruddier strategy=20 than what we can already do (which is to never get an transmit interrupt, as long as the kernel can shove data into the device fast enough to keep the queue from going empty.) The whole *point* of a=20 low-watermark interrupt is to never have to actually get the interrupt,= =20 if the rest of the system is on its toes and is supplying data fast enough. --linas