[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B4CCC7B.8040609@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:24:43 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: James Kosin <JKosin@...comgrp.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: arm: Optimization for ethernet MAC handling at91_ether.c
Le 12/01/2010 20:03, James Kosin a écrit :
>
> Scratch that. The interrupt doesn't queue up or send another packet directly. So, it wouldn't help on performance here. But, may in other implementations that queue/transmit packets in the ISR. At least in the case where the transmitter is limited to one.
>
It could, at least on SMP. tx completion wakes a blocked sender, while
this cpu continue with RX handling (possibly expensive)
But even on UP, doing tx completion before rx handling allows
a better reuse of skb just freed (and partly present in cpu cache, if available).
Start of IRQ
1) tx completion
-> free a skb
2) rx handling:
-> allocate an skb, kmalloc() reuses previous one, still in cpu cache.
End of IRQ
--
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