| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <477ECCD7.8090905@katalix.com> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:18:31 +0000 From: James Chapman <jchapman@...alix.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com Subject: Re: NAPI poll behavior in various Intel drivers David Miller wrote: > From: James Chapman <jchapman@...alix.com> > Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:10:30 +0000 > >> With the latest NAPI, this code has to change. But rather than remove >> the tx_cleaned logic completely, shouldn't transmit processing be >> included in the work_done accounting when a driver does transmit cleanup >> processing in the poll? > > Most other NAPI drivers don't do this, they just process all the > pending TX work unconditionally and do not account it into the NAPI > poll work. This will cause the interface to thrash in/out of polled mode very quickly when it is doing almost all transmit work. That's something to avoid, no? > The logic is that, like link state handling, TX work is very cheap and > not the cpu cycle eater that RX packet processing is. The processing is cheap but it is being done in the poll so it is scheduled by NAPI. The event rate for TX events can be just as high as RX. For link state handling, the event rate is always low so won't cause NAPI to schedule rapidly. -- James Chapman Katalix Systems Ltd http://www.katalix.com Catalysts for your Embedded Linux software development -- 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