From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: vipul@chelsio.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, divy@chelsio.com, dm@chelsio.com,
leedom@chelsio.com, abhishek@chelsio.com, jay@chelsio.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] cxgb4: Send Flush Work Request on a TX Queue
Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2013 23:04:46 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130202.230446.1136757468633811792.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1359641187-17902-1-git-send-email-vipul@chelsio.com>
From: Vipul Pandya <vipul@chelsio.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 19:36:26 +0530
> Send Flush Work Request on a TX Queue if it has unreclaimed TX Descriptors
> and the last time anything was sent on the associated net device was more than
> 5 seconds in the past, issue a flush request on the TX Queue in order to get
> any stranded skb's off the TX Queue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jay Hernandez <jay@chelsio.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vipul Pandya <vipul@chelsio.com>
Is the "TX finished" event reporting mechanism supported by this chip
so broken that you cannot use that instead?
Timers and deferred logic to reclaim TX entries is terrible for the
Linux stack. It means that socket reclaim is delayed, it means that
you really cannot support byte queue limits, it means that TCP Small
Queues won't work properly, it means that packet schedulers can
measure traffic in a wildly inaccurate manner, and so on and so forth.
I'd rather you guys fix these TX reclaim issues properly, rather
than continuing to paper over them with hacks. A 5 second delay
on TX packet reclaim is absolutely not acceptable.
I'm not applying these two patches, sorry.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-03 4:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-31 14:06 [PATCH net-next 1/2] cxgb4: Send Flush Work Request on a TX Queue Vipul Pandya
2013-01-31 14:06 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] cxgb4vf: " Vipul Pandya
2013-02-03 4:04 ` David Miller [this message]
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=20130202.230446.1136757468633811792.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=abhishek@chelsio.com \
--cc=divy@chelsio.com \
--cc=dm@chelsio.com \
--cc=jay@chelsio.com \
--cc=leedom@chelsio.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vipul@chelsio.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).