From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Hayes Wang <hayeswang@realtek.com>
Cc: "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@amd.com>,
"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"Paul Menzel" <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>
Subject: Re: Error 'netif_napi_add_weight() called with weight 256'
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 11:37:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230809113732.5806b550@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ba9b777754f7493ba14faa2dab7d8d59@realtek.com>
On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 13:11:57 +0000 Hayes Wang wrote:
> I think it depends on the platform.
> Most of the platforms don't have the same situation.
> Besides, I think the platform with 100Gbps device may
> have faster CPU than that one which I test.
>
> What would happen, if I set the weight to 256 on the platform
> which runs well for the weight of 64?
> Doesn't it only influence the slow platform?
High weight will cause higher latency for other softirq and RT
processing, it's not a good idea. Even with weight/budget of 64
if there's no higher prio work to do the driver will be polled
again immediately if it consumed the budget and has more packets.
Do you have some actual data on how the device performs with budget
of 64 and 256? And maybe perf traces to show where the difference goes?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-09 18:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-31 16:02 Error 'netif_napi_add_weight() called with weight 256' Limonciello, Mario
2023-07-31 18:13 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-07-31 18:23 ` Limonciello, Mario
2023-07-31 20:47 ` Stephen Hemminger
2023-08-07 9:57 ` Hayes Wang
2023-08-07 16:37 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-08-09 13:11 ` Hayes Wang
2023-08-09 18:37 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2023-08-14 7:07 ` Hayes Wang
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=20230809113732.5806b550@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hayeswang@realtek.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
/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).