[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221205175314.0487527a@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 17:53:14 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: <yang.yang29@....com.cn>
Cc: <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
<bigeasy@...utronix.de>, <imagedong@...cent.com>,
<kuniyu@...zon.com>, <petrm@...dia.com>, <liu3101@...due.edu>,
<wujianguo@...natelecom.cn>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next] net: record times of netdev_budget exhausted
On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 16:12:05 +0800 (CST) yang.yang29@....com.cn wrote:
> A long time ago time_squeeze was used to only record netdev_budget
> exhausted[1]. Then we added netdev_budget_usecs to enable softirq
> tuning[2]. And when polling elapsed netdev_budget_usecs, it's also
> record by time_squeeze.
> For tuning netdev_budget and netdev_budget_usecs respectively, we'd
> better distinguish netdev_budget exhausted from netdev_budget_usecs
> elapsed, so add a new recorder to record netdev_budget exhausted.
You're tuning netdev_budget and netdev_budget_usecs ?
You need to say more because I haven't seen anyone do that before.
time_squeeze is extremely noisy and annoyingly useless,
we need to understand exactly what you're doing before
we accept any changes to this core piece of code.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists