From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Matt Smith <Matt.Smith@atheros.com>,
Kevin Hayes <kevin@atheros.com>,
Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>, Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>,
Ivan Seskar <Seskar@winlab.rutgers.edu>,
ic.felix@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Stop using tasklets for bottom halves
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 17:14:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090907171406.6a4b6116@nehalam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43e72e890909071558s637b45c7i10807587dc40e8c4@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 15:58:50 -0700
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:
> A while ago I had read about an effort to consider removing tasklets
> [1] or at least trying to not use them. I'm unaware of the progress in
> this respect but since reading that article have always tried to
> evaluate whether or not we need tasklets on wireless drivers. I have
> also wondered whether work in irq context in other parts of the kernel
> can be moved to process context, a curious example being timers. I'll
> personally be trying to using only process context on bottom halves on
> future drivers but I figured it may be a good time to ask how serious
> was avoiding tasklets or using wrappers in the future to avoid irq
> context is or is it advised. Do we have a general agreement this is a
> good step forward to take? Has anyone made tests or changes on a
> specific driver from irq context to process context and proven there
> are no significant advantages of using irq context where you would
> have expected it?
>
> Wireless in particular should IMHO not require taskets for anything
> time sensitive that I can think about except perhaps changing channels
> quickly and to do that appropriately also process pending RX frames
> prior to a switch. It remains to be seen experimentally whether or not
> using a workqueue for RX processing would affect the time to switch
> channels negatively but I doubt it would be significant. I hope to
> test that with ath9k_htc.
>
> What about gigabit or 10 Gigabit Ethernet drivers ? Do they face any
> challenges which would yet need to be proven would not face issues
> when processing bottom halves in process context?
>
> [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/239633/
>
> Luis
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Why not use NAPI, which is soft irq? Almost all 1G and 10G drivers
use NAPI.
Process context is too slow.
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-08 0:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-07 22:58 Stop using tasklets for bottom halves Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-09-08 0:14 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2009-09-08 2:17 ` Steven Rostedt
[not found] ` <1252376254.21261.2052.camel-f9ZlEuEWxVcI6MkJdU+c8EEOCMrvLtNR@public.gmane.org>
2009-09-08 4:16 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
[not found] ` <43e72e890909072116v33ecafc4ma7f5a68825f14e9-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2009-09-08 13:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-09-08 4:50 ` Michael Buesch
2009-09-08 5:08 ` Michael Buesch
2009-09-08 7:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-09-08 16:11 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-09-08 16:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-09-08 17:01 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-09-08 17:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-09-08 16:12 ` 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=20090907171406.6a4b6116@nehalam \
--to=shemminger@vyatta.com \
--cc=Matt.Smith@atheros.com \
--cc=Seskar@winlab.rutgers.edu \
--cc=ic.felix@gmail.com \
--cc=j@w1.fi \
--cc=kevin@atheros.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=mcgrof@gmail.com \
--cc=me@bobcopeland.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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).