[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53512600.6020902@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 21:17:52 +0800
From: zhangfei <zhangfei.gao@...aro.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: linux@....linux.org.uk, arnd@...db.de, f.fainelli@...il.com,
sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com, mark.rutland@....com,
David.Laight@...LAB.COM, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: hisilicon: new hip04 ethernet driver
Dear David
On 04/08/2014 02:53 AM, David Miller wrote:
>> +static void hip04_tx_reclaim(struct net_device *ndev, bool force)
> ...
>> +static void hip04_xmit_timer(unsigned long data)
>> +{
>> + struct net_device *ndev = (void *) data;
>> +
>> + hip04_tx_reclaim(ndev, false);
>> +}
> ...
>> + mod_timer(&priv->txtimer, jiffies + RECLAIM_PERIOD);
>
> And this is where I stop reading your driver, I've stated already that this
> kind of reclaim scheme is unacceptable.
>
> The kernel timers lack the granularity necessary to service TX reclaim
> with a reasonable amount of latency.
>
> You must use some kind of hardware notification of TX slots becomming
> available, I find it totally impossible that a modern ethernet controller
> was created without a TX done interrupt.
>
There is no tx_done interrupt, we may need some workaround.
Is it acceptable to use poll to reclaim the xmitted buffer.
And in the xmit calling napi_schedule.
Thanks
--
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