[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <OF26E08E6B.9C6CD04B-ON87257332.00635BE5-88257332.00642BE1@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 11:16:12 -0700
From: Shirley Ma <xma@...ibm.com>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hadi@...erus.ca,
jgarzik@...ox.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC]: napi_struct V5
Hello Roland,
> Shirley, I think it would still be useful to run benchmarks of IPoIB
> on ehca with Dave's NAPI patches, both V5 that changed the "missed
> event" behavior and V6 that didn't. At least I'm curious to know how
> much the difference is.
>
> - R.
The performance difference was huge before. Most of the time the poll more
method was only polling one packet again and agin.
Yes, we will definitely run the performance measurement, but I have
lowered this task priority since Dave has V6 version. Actually IPoIB is
not the only one device using rescheduling instead of polling more for
NAPI. I think it's not a bad idea to do so.
Thanks
Shirley
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists