[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1331036030.2474.40.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 04:13:50 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
eilong@...adcom.com, ian.campbell@...rix.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, w.sang@...gutronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kevin.wells@....com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, arnd@...db.de,
baruch@...s.co.il, joe@...ches.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] lpc32xx: Added ethernet driver
Le mardi 06 mars 2012 à 09:53 +0100, Roland Stigge a écrit :
> Sounds reasonable, and will do it.
>
> However, I implemented it from the example of
> drivers/net/ethernet/via/via-velocity.c:velocity_poll() - is there a
> good reason for doing it that way in the velocity driver or is it done
> incorrectly there, also?
>
Its done in a non efficient way.
It works as is, but its not the right thing to do.
The NAPI port was very minimal on via-velocity it seems.
A better way is to hold no locks in the RX handler, allowing calls to
netif_receive_skb() [ and potential calls to xmit while handling this
incoming skbs ]
Problem of saying "we dont expect to be SMP anyway", is that this let
reference material for future drivers that will copy/paste the code,
then experience performance problems.
--
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