netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Karl Hiramoto <karl@hiramoto.org>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: philipp_subx@redfish-solutions.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-atm-general@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linux-ATM-General] [PATCH] atm/br2684: netif_stop_queue() when atm device busy and netif_wake_queue() when we can send packets again.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:44:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AAF9A55.8030207@hiramoto.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090911.114848.177667600.davem@davemloft.net>

David Miller wrote:
> From: Karl Hiramoto <karl@hiramoto.org>
> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 23:30:44 +0200
>
>   
>> I'm not really sure if or how many packets to upper layers buffer.
>>     
>
> This is determined by ->tx_queue_len, so whatever value is being
> set for ATM network devices is what the core will use for backlog
> limiting while the device's TX queue is stopped.
I tried varying tx_queue_len by 10, 100,  and 1000x, but it didn't seem 
to help much.  Whenever the atm dev called netif_wake_queue() it seems 
like the driver still starves for packets  and still takes time to get 
going again.


It seem like when the driver calls netif_wake_queue() it's TX hardware 
queue is nearly full, but it has space to accept new packets.  The TX 
hardware queue has time to empty, devices starves for packets(goes 
idle), then finally a packet comes in from the upper networking 
layers.   I'm not really sure at the moment where the problem lies to my 
maximum throughput dropping.

I did try changing sk_sndbuf to 256K but that didn't seem to help either.

--
Karl

  reply	other threads:[~2009-09-15 13:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-08-28 10:38 [PATCH] br2684 testing needed for packet loss and performance Karl Hiramoto
2009-08-28 12:25 ` [Linux-ATM-General] " Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR)
2009-08-29 10:24   ` Karl Hiramoto
2009-08-29 11:24     ` [PATCH] atm/br2684: netif_stop_queue() when atm device busy and netif_wake_queue() when we can send packets again Karl Hiramoto
2009-08-31 14:29       ` Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR)
2009-09-03  6:27         ` David Miller
2009-09-03 13:44           ` Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR)
2009-09-10 19:49       ` [Linux-ATM-General] " Philip A. Prindeville
2009-09-10 21:30         ` Karl Hiramoto
2009-09-11 18:48           ` David Miller
2009-09-15 13:44             ` Karl Hiramoto [this message]
2009-09-15 14:57               ` Karl Hiramoto
2009-09-16 18:04                 ` Philip A. Prindeville
2009-09-11 19:56           ` Philip A. Prindeville

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=4AAF9A55.8030207@hiramoto.org \
    --to=karl@hiramoto.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-atm-general@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=philipp_subx@redfish-solutions.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).