On Monday, November 21, 2011 12:36:15 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:29:29AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Friday, November 18, 2011 5:04:58 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:16:00AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> > > > On 11/18/2011 09:54, Luigi Rizzo wrot
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:29:29AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, November 18, 2011 5:04:58 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:16:00AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> > > On 11/18/2011 09:54, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > > > One more thing (i am mentioning it here for archival purp
On Friday, November 18, 2011 5:04:58 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:16:00AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> > On 11/18/2011 09:54, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > > One more thing (i am mentioning it here for archival purposes,
> > > as i keep forgetting to test it). Is entropy harvesting ex
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:16:00AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 11/18/2011 09:54, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > One more thing (i am mentioning it here for archival purposes,
> > as i keep forgetting to test it). Is entropy harvesting expensive ?
>
> No. It was designed to be inexpensive on purpose. :)
On 11/18/2011 09:54, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> One more thing (i am mentioning it here for archival purposes,
> as i keep forgetting to test it). Is entropy harvesting expensive ?
No. It was designed to be inexpensive on purpose. :)
--
"We could put the whole Internet into a book."
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:20:04PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, November 18, 2011 12:06:15 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
...
> > A bit more context: Matteo is looking at the latency of RPCs across
> > the network involving userspace processes, and possibly using the
> > netmap API. As we underst
On Friday, November 18, 2011 12:06:15 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 08:00:06AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Friday, November 18, 2011 3:46:02 am Matteo Landi wrote:
> > > > you probably want to be using MSI-X for a 10G NIC instead of INTx
> > > > anyway.
> > >
> > > Why do
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 08:00:06AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, November 18, 2011 3:46:02 am Matteo Landi wrote:
> > > you probably want to be using MSI-X for a 10G NIC instead of INTx anyway.
> >
> > Why do you say that? Is MSI-X faster than INTx in terms of interrupt
> > latency? When
On Friday, November 18, 2011 3:46:02 am Matteo Landi wrote:
> > you probably want to be using MSI-X for a 10G NIC instead of INTx anyway.
>
> Why do you say that? Is MSI-X faster than INTx in terms of interrupt
> latency? When should I use MSI-X, instead of fast filters interrupts
> (fast interrup
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Ryan Stone wrote:
> The comments haven't kept up with the code. You are correct; in the
> legacy interrupt case ixgbe is using an ITHREAD, not a fast handler.
Do I have to send an email to the maintainer of the ixgbe driver and
ask him to update the comments, or
> you probably want to be using MSI-X for a 10G NIC instead of INTx anyway.
Why do you say that? Is MSI-X faster than INTx in terms of interrupt
latency? When should I use MSI-X, instead of fast filters interrupts
(fast interrupt?), instead of ithread interrupts? Thanks in advace.
Regards,
Matte
On Thursday, November 17, 2011 6:38:21 am Matteo Landi wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> trying to measure the interrupt latency of a 10G Intel network
> adapter, I find out that the the used driver (ixgbe) can can be
> configured to work with both fast and standard interrupts. From my
> understanding of
The comments haven't kept up with the code. You are correct; in the
legacy interrupt case ixgbe is using an ITHREAD, not a fast handler.
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe
13 matches
Mail list logo
