[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080425.004634.27450322.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:46:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: therbert@...gle.com
Cc: andi@...stfloor.org, johnwheffner@...il.com, rick.jones2@...com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Socket buffer sizes with autotuning
From: "Tom Herbert" <therbert@...gle.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:42:03 -0700
> If NIC is interrupt driven, enough data must be queued to span
> consecutive interrupts. So for instance if a 10G NIC is generating an
> interrupt every 100us, about 125,000 bytes needs to queued at each
> interrupt to prevent starvation-- this doesn't translate to a fixed
> number of packets. Limiting by packets seems somewhat ad hoc; if the
> limit is to small and the link will be starved, too big and
> over-queuing results.
Yes, however when packets are small the limiting factor becomes
per-transfer transaction related overhead.
--
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