[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090325142540.GA20944@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:25:40 +0300
From: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
Cc: Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, leoli@...escale.com,
'linuxppc-dev Development' <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ucc_geth: Move freeing of TX packets to NAPI context.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 02:30:49PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >>From 1c2f23b1f37f4818c0fd0217b93eb38ab6564840 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:19:27 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] ucc_geth: Move freeing of TX packets to NAPI context.
> Also increase NAPI weight somewhat.
> This will make the system alot more responsive while
> ping flooding the ucc_geth ethernet interaface.
Some time ago I've tried a similar thing for this driver, but during
tcp (or udp I don't quite remember) netperf tests I was getting tx
watchdog timeouts after ~2-5 minutes of work. I was testing with a
gigabit and 100 Mbit link, with 100 Mbit link the issue was not
reproducible.
Though, I recalling I was doing a bit more than your patch: I was
also clearing the TX events in the ucce register before calling
ucc_geth_tx, that way I was trying to avoid stale interrupts. That
helped to increase an overall performance (not only responsiveness),
but as I said my approach didn't pass the tests.
I don't really think that your patch may cause this, but can you
try netperf w/ this patch applied anyway? And see if it really
doesn't cause any issues under stress?
Thanks,
--
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@...il.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2
--
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