From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20070824.144711.18301866.davem@davemloft.net> References: <200708241747.16592.ossthema@de.ibm.com> <20070824085203.42f4305c@freepuppy.rosehill.hemminger.net> <46CF127D.1090609@katalix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: shemminger@linux-foundation.org, ossthema@de.ibm.com, akepner@sgi.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, raisch@de.ibm.com, themann@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, meder@de.ibm.com, tklein@de.ibm.com, stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com To: jchapman@katalix.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:40841 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760445AbXHXVrM (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2007 17:47:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46CF127D.1090609@katalix.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: James Chapman Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:16:45 +0100 > Does hardware interrupt mitigation really interact well with NAPI? It interacts quite excellently. There was a long saga about this with tg3 and huge SGI numa systems with large costs for interrupt processing, and the fix was to do a minimal amount of interrupt mitigation and this basically cleared up all the problems. Someone should reference that thread _now_ before this discussion goes too far and we repeat a lot of information and people like myself have to stay up all night correcting the misinformation and misunderstandings that are basically guarenteed for this topic :)