netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: mchan@broadcom.com
Cc: andy@greyhouse.net, jfeeney@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bnx2: Increase max rx ring size from 1K to 2K
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 01:14:34 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101019.011434.226774173.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1287448254-14173-1-git-send-email-mchan@broadcom.com>

From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@broadcom.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:30:54 -0700

> A number of customers are reporting packet loss under certain workloads
> (e.g. heavy bursts of small packets) with flow control disabled.  A larger
> rx ring helps to prevent these losses.
> 
> No change in default rx ring size and memory consumption.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>
> Acked-by: John Feeney <jfeeney@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Chan <mchan@broadcom.com>

I don't see how it's any better to queue things more deeply in
hardware, compared to simply using hardware flow control since that's
what it's for and makes the queuing happen in the networking stack of
the sender, in software, which in the end performs better and gives
better feedback to the source of the data.

These huge RX queue sizes are absolutely rediculious, and I've
complained about this before.

And instead of seeing less of this, I keep seeing more of this stuff.
Please exert some pushback on these folks who are doing such insane
things.

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-10-19  8:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-10-19  0:30 [PATCH net-next] bnx2: Increase max rx ring size from 1K to 2K Michael Chan
2010-10-19  8:14 ` David Miller [this message]
2010-10-19 17:03   ` Michael Chan
2010-10-21 10:13 ` 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=20101019.011434.226774173.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=andy@greyhouse.net \
    --cc=jfeeney@redhat.com \
    --cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).