Re: [PATCH 3/3] Virtio draft IV: the net driver

[Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>]

On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 13:44 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:45:40 +0200
> 
> > Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 schrieb Rusty Russell:
> > > +static void receive_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb,
> > [...]
> > > +	netif_rx(skb);
> > 
> > In the NAPI case, we should use netif_receive_skb, no?
> 
> NAPI doesn't make sense for virtual devices, my Sun LDOM nework
> driver won't use NAPI either.
> 
> It's also too cumbersome to use NAPI with the way virtualized
> network drivers work (multiple ports, each with an interrupt
> source, not just one) until the NAPI split patches are ported
> and applied upstream and that won't be for a while.

Dave, I think you're the only one (so far?) with multiple irqs.

It's not clear that guest-controlled interrupt mitigation is the best
approach for virtual devices, but at the moment it doesn't hurt.

Cheers,
Rusty.