[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091119080831.GA6874@ff.dom.local>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 08:08:31 +0000
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rps: core implementation
On 16-11-2009 17:43, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 3:19 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> From: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
>> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:53:17 -0800
>>
>>> + /* Schedule NAPI for backlog device */
>>> + if (napi_schedule_prep(&queue->backlog)) {
>>> + if (cpu != smp_processor_id()) {
>>> + cpu_set(cpu,
>>> + get_cpu_var(rps_remote_softirq_cpus));
>>> + __raise_softirq_irqoff(NET_RPS_SOFTIRQ);
>>> + } else
>>> + __napi_schedule(&queue->backlog);
>>> + }
>>> + goto enqueue;
>> {,__}send_remote_softirq() doesn't work? :-)
>>
> NET_RPS_SOFTIRQ is intended to provide coalescing of IPIs.
It seems calling net_rps_action() at the end of net_rx_action() should
do (mostly) the same, at least for napi drivers. And I'm not sure it's
worth to add a new softirq because of non-napis.
Jarek P.
--
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