Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Sun Oct 07 2007 - 05:08:42 EST



* Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> * I feel TX NAPI is a useful tool, because it provides an independent TX
> process control point and system load feedback point.
> Thus I felt this was slightly superior to tasklets.

/me agrees violently

btw., when i played with this tunable under -rt:

enum {
NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT,
NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_CPU
};
static int optimization_mode = NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT;

the MODE_CPU one gave (much) _higher_ bandwidth. The queueing model in
forcedeth seemed to be not that robust and i think a single queueing
model should be adopted instead of this tunable. (which i think just hid
some bug/dependency) But i never got to the bottom of it so it's just
the impression i got.

Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/