From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:43:06 -0600
> So the tg3_tx() and tg3_start_xmit do not include any code of reprogramming
> the hardware?
Right, they just process the TX ring.
> What kinds of code can be classifed to reprogramming the hardware? Should
> the
Thanks, David. Some questions are as following:
> It depends, the locking changed significantly in the current
> 2.6.13-rcX version of the driver. But before that:
>
> 1) ->hard_start_xmit() needs to hold the tx_lock with hard IRQs
>disabled, as does tg3_tx(). It uses NETIF_F_LLTX locking,
From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:04:40 -0600
> I did some small test showing that polling can improve the packet processing
> throughput a bit. I still need to do more tests. Could anyone give me some
> information about the lock scheme of RX and TX precedure?
I did some small test showing that polling can improve the packet processing
throughput a bit. I still need to do more tests. Could anyone give me some
information about the lock scheme of RX and TX precedure? I would be very
appreciate. Thanks.
Qinghua
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
> Linux is a general purpose operating system.
>
> Even as a dedicated router, a router daemon still has to execute
> in userspace to do BGP etc. signaling with routing peers. The
> administrator also might want to run diagnostic tools to monitor
> the network.
>
> You cannot spin polling on the d
> >
> > > In my SMP platform, there is no other processes running. The usage of
> CPUs
> > > are 100% and 0%. How could I make Nic interrupts not arrive at only
one
> CPU,
> > > or balance the interrupt between two CPUs?
> >
> > This doesn't work. If you try to split up the work for one network
>
>
> > In my SMP platform, there is no other processes running. The usage of
CPUs
> > are 100% and 0%. How could I make Nic interrupts not arrive at only one
CPU,
> > or balance the interrupt between two CPUs?
>
> This doesn't work. If you try to split up the work for one network
> card amongst mul
From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 15:57:00 -0600
> In my SMP platform, there is no other processes running. The usage of CPUs
> are 100% and 0%. How could I make Nic interrupts not arrive at only one CPU,
> or balance the interrupt between two CPUs?
This doesn't
> It is not Click's right to make this kind of decision, that is what
> we have the process scheduler for.
>
Click's scheduler is aim to make packet processing tasks with highest
priority. It's just for the dedicated use. Since Linux is a general OS, and
it is free and fatastic, so it is possible
From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 14:12:29 -0600
> Yes, you are right. Click acturally will release the CPU to OS at interval.
> Other processes will be responded at this interval.
It is not Click's right to make this kind of decision, that is what
we have the pr
From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 13:15:40 -0600
> Yes, It wastes CPU cycles if there is other process running. However, as it
> being a dedicated router, it should not be a problem. The process of packets
> is the only task it is supposed to do.
Linux is a gener
From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 11:36:40 -0600
> > > Compared to NAPI, click polling will disable Nic interrupts during its
> > > operation, even there is no any packets in the rx buffer.
> >
> > This destroys latency if you only recheck the RX buffer using
> >
Yes, It wastes CPU cycles if there is other process running. However, as it
being a dedicated router, it should not be a problem. The process of packets
is the only task it is supposed to do.
>
> > > > Compared to NAPI, click polling will disable Nic interrupts during
its
> > > > operation, even th
> > Compared to NAPI, click polling will disable Nic interrupts during its
> > operation, even there is no any packets in the rx buffer.
>
> This destroys latency if you only recheck the RX buffer using
> timer interrupts. Even with HZ=1000, on gigabit links your packet
> latency will be terrible.
From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 16:19:27 -0600
> Compared to NAPI, click polling will disable Nic interrupts during its
> operation, even there is no any packets in the rx buffer.
This destroys latency if you only recheck the RX buffer using
timer interrupts.
ent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: help on tg3 polling extension
> From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:38:57 -0600
>
> > I am thinking about extending the tg3 driver to support Click Polling.
>
> What is Clic
From: "Qinghua(Kevin) Ye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:38:57 -0600
> I am thinking about extending the tg3 driver to support Click Polling.
What is Click Polling, and why would we want it?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message
Hi, all,
I am thinking about extending the tg3 driver to support Click Polling. Click
has its patch on linux kernel, and adds some callback functions and polling
variable to the net_device struct(I did this work on 2.6.11 kernel, and on
AMD opteron):
netdev->polling = 0; // Check if click p
18 matches
Mail list logo
