Jason Lunz wrote:
I'd be particularly interested to see what happens to your latency when other apps are hogging the cpu. I assume from your description that your cpu is mostly free to schedule the niced softirqd for the device polling duration, but this won't always be the case. If other tasks are running at high priority, it could be nearly a full jiffy before softirqd gets to check the poll list again and the latency introduced could be much higher than you've yet measured.
Indeed. The effect of cpu load on all of this is important to consider. The challenge will be how to test it fairly on different test runs.
One thing to bear in mind is that interrupts are processed at highest priority, above any scheduled work. Reducing interrupt rate gives the scheduler more chance to run what it thinks is the next highest priority work. This might be at the expense of network processing. Is it better to give other runnable tasks a fair chunk of the cpu pie? I think so.
I'll try to incorporate application cpu load into my tests. Thanks for your feedback.
-- James Chapman Katalix Systems Ltd http://www.katalix.com Catalysts for your Embedded Linux software development - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
