From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Chapman Subject: Re: RFC: possible NAPI improvements to reduce interrupt rates for low traffic rates Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:25:57 +0100 Message-ID: <46E50DA5.8050403@katalix.com> References: <200709061416.l86EG0Vb017675@quickie.katalix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, hadi@cyberus.ca, davem@davemloft.net, jeff@garzik.org, mandeep.baines@gmail.com, ossthema@de.ibm.com To: Andi Kleen Return-path: Received: from s36.avahost.net ([74.53.95.194]:38603 "EHLO s36.avahost.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751668AbXIJJ0A (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Sep 2007 05:26:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen wrote: > James Chapman writes: > On some platforms the precise timers (like ktime_get()) can be slow, > but often they are fast. It might make sense to use a shorter > constant time wait on those with fast timers at least. Right now this > cannot be known by portable code, but there was a proposal some time > ago to export some global estimate to tell how fast > ktime_get().et.al. are. That could be reviewed. Interesting. Is ktime_get() fast enough on P4 systems? I'll be using those to test with. -- James Chapman Katalix Systems Ltd http://www.katalix.com Catalysts for your Embedded Linux software development