From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support. Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 14:39:32 +0200 Message-ID: <466D4284.1030004@trash.net> References: <1181082517.4062.31.camel@localhost> <4666CEB7.6030804@trash.net> <1181168020.4064.46.camel@localhost> <466D38CF.9060709@trash.net> <1181564611.4043.220.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org, "Kok, Auke-jan H" To: hadi@cyberus.ca Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:41552 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751366AbXFKMmB (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jun 2007 08:42:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1181564611.4043.220.camel@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org jamal wrote: > On Mon, 2007-11-06 at 13:58 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > > >>Thats not true. Assume PSL has lots of packets, PSH is empty. We >>fill the PHL queue until their is no room left, so the driver >>has to stop the queue. > > > Sure. Packets stashed on the any DMA ring are considered "gone to the > wire". That is a very valid assumption to make. I disagree, its obviously not true and leads to the behaviour I described. If it were true there would be no reason to use multiple HW TX queues to begin with. >>[...] > > i can see your thought process building - > You are actually following what i am saying;-> I am :)