From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH 2/3][NET_BATCH] net core use batching Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 14:22:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20071009.142235.74385364.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20071009.134331.35664207.davem@davemloft.net> <20071009135340.33e5922c@freepuppy.rosehill> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, gaagaan@gmail.com, jeff@garzik.org, rdreier@cisco.com, peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, mcarlson@broadcom.com, andi@firstfloor.org, general@lists.openfabrics.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, tgraf@suug.ch, randy.dunlap@oracle.com, jagana@us.ibm.com, kaber@trash.net, mchan@broadcom.com, sri@us.ibm.com To: shemminger@linux-foundation.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20071009135340.33e5922c@freepuppy.rosehill> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: general-bounces@lists.openfabrics.org Errors-To: general-bounces@lists.openfabrics.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Stephen Hemminger Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 13:53:40 -0700 > I was thinking why not have a default transmit queue len of 0 like > the virtual devices. I'm not so sure. Even if the device has "huge queues" I still think we need a software queue for when the hardware one backs up. It is even beneficial to stick with reasonably sized TX queues because it keeps the total resident state accessed by the CPU within the bounds of the L2 cache. If you go past that it actually hurts to make the TX queue larger instead of helps even if it means you never hit back pressure.