From: Bill Fink <billfink@mindspring.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: krkumar2@in.ibm.com, mchan@broadcom.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
vinay@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3]: tg3: Manage TX backlog in-driver.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:41:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080620154124.eb91fd5e.billfink@mindspring.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080620.120422.193703152.davem@davemloft.net>
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, David Miller wrote:
> From: Bill Fink <billfink@mindspring.com>
> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:52:33 -0400
>
> > I have a general question about this new tx queueing model, which
> > I haven't seen discussed to this point.
> >
> > Although hopefully not frequent events, if the tx queue is kept in
> > the driver rather than the network midlayer, what are the ramifications
> > of a routing change which requires changing the output to a new interface,
> > considering for example that on our 10-GigE interfaces we typically set
> > txqueuelen to 10000.
>
> All of the packets would have been in the existing mid-layer generic
> backlog anyways, way past the routing decisions. Nothing about
> behavior in this area would be changing.
Great. I wasn't aware the mid-layer generic backlog was after the
routing decisions. Thanks for educating me (and others). I learn
new things about the Linux network stack all the time, plus it's
always changing, so can be a challenge to keep up with it if you're
not a full-time developer.
> > Similarly, what are the ramifications of such a change to the bonding
> > driver (either in a load balancing or active/backup scenario) when one
> > of the interfaces fails (again hopefully a rare event).
>
> Since the bonding driver acts like a pass-thru, and because of the
> above, I expect no real ramifications in this area as well.
Also good to know.
-Thanks
-Bill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-20 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-19 11:10 [PATCH 3/3]: tg3: Manage TX backlog in-driver David Miller
2008-06-20 10:48 ` Krishna Kumar2
2008-06-20 18:52 ` Bill Fink
2008-06-20 19:04 ` David Miller
2008-06-20 19:41 ` Bill Fink [this message]
2008-06-20 23:20 ` David Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-06-20 23:17 David Miller
2008-06-21 17:02 ` Michael Chan
2008-06-22 23:49 ` David Miller
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=20080620154124.eb91fd5e.billfink@mindspring.com \
--to=billfink@mindspring.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=krkumar2@in.ibm.com \
--cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vinay@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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).