[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B4CBA93.4090909@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 19:08:19 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: James Kosin <JKosin@...comgrp.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: arm: Optimization for ethernet MAC handling at91_ether.c
Le 12/01/2010 18:51, James Kosin a écrit :
> On 1/12/2010 11:40 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> If this happens once in a while, why do you want driver to retry the transmit ?
>
> (a) It would improve performance by allowing the ISR to handle the re-transmit in this case.
> (b) It would help in the case of small glitches that may happen from external SDRAM without taxing the polling required to handle the re-transmit of the packet... ie: overhead required to re-queue and initiate a packet delivery... since the packet is already scheduled for delivery now.
>
OK, but then this also adds an extra check for each tx completion.
I dont have this piece of hardware, but seeing it has a one skb tx queue (!),
I suppose TX performance is not very good anyway...
at91ether_interrupt() should probably handle tx completion before rx, to feed
next frame faster.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists