From: Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@linux.intel.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@gmail.com>,
e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
HPA <hpa@zytor.com>, Amir Vadai <amirv@mellanox.com>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
Eliezer Tamir <eliezer@tamir.org.il>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>,
Eilon Greenstien <eilong@broadcom.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 net-next 2/7] net: add low latency socket poll
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:46:34 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51AF5D5A.8030907@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1370446760.24311.275.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
On 05/06/2013 18:39, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 18:30 +0300, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
>> On 05/06/2013 18:21, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> It would also make sense to give end_time as a parameter, so that the
>>> polling() code could really give a end_time for the whole duration of
>>> poll().
>>>
>>> (You then should test can_poll_ll(end_time) _before_ call to
>>> ndo_ll_poll())
>>
>> how would you handle a nonblocking operation in that case?
>> I guess if we have a socket option, then we don't need to handle none
>> blocking any diffrent, since the user specified exactly how much time to
>> waste polling. right?
>
> If the thread already spent 50us in the poll() system call, it for sure
> should not call any ndo_ll_poll(). This makes no more sense at this
> point.
what about a non-blocking read from a socket?
Right now we assume this means poll only once since the application will
repeat as needed.
maybe add a "once" parameter that will cause sk_poll_ll() to ignore end
time and only try once?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations
2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services
3. A single system of record for all IT processes
http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-05 15:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-05 10:34 [PATCH v9 net-next 0/7] net: low latency Ethernet device polling Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 10:34 ` [PATCH v9 net-next 1/7] net: add napi_id and hash Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 13:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 10:34 ` [PATCH v9 net-next 2/7] net: add low latency socket poll Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 13:23 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 15:28 ` Willem de Bruijn
2013-06-05 15:31 ` Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 15:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 15:30 ` Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 15:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 15:46 ` Eliezer Tamir [this message]
2013-06-05 15:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-06 12:50 ` Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 10:34 ` [PATCH v9 net-next 3/7] udp: add low latency socket poll support Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 13:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 10:34 ` [PATCH v9 net-next 4/7] tcp: " Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 13:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 10:34 ` [PATCH v9 net-next 5/7] net: simple poll/select low latency socket poll Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 13:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 13:41 ` Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 13:56 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 14:17 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 14:56 ` Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 15:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 15:47 ` Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 13:49 ` David Laight
2013-06-05 14:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-05 10:35 ` [PATCH v9 net-next 6/7] ixgbe: add support for ndo_ll_poll Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-05 10:35 ` [PATCH v9 net-next 7/7] ixgbe: add extra stats " Eliezer Tamir
2013-06-07 21:48 ` [PATCH v9 net-next 0/7] net: low latency Ethernet device polling David Miller
2013-06-08 18:06 ` Eliezer Tamir
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=51AF5D5A.8030907@linux.intel.com \
--to=eliezer.tamir@linux.intel.com \
--cc=amirv@mellanox.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=eilong@broadcom.com \
--cc=eliezer@tamir.org.il \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=or.gerlitz@gmail.com \
--cc=willemb@google.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).