netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH 2/2] drivers: net: cpsw: add separate napi for tx packet handling for performance improvment

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <55B86240.4090301@ti.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:48:56 +0530
From:	Mugunthan V N <mugunthanvnm@...com>
To:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
CC:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/2] drivers: net: cpsw: add separate napi for
 tx packet handling for performance improvment

On Wednesday 29 July 2015 04:00 AM, Francois Romieu wrote:
> Mugunthan V N <mugunthanvnm@...com> :
>> On Tuesday 28 July 2015 02:52 AM, Francois Romieu wrote:
>>> Mugunthan V N <mugunthanvnm@...com> :
> [...]
>>>> @@ -752,13 +753,22 @@ static irqreturn_t cpsw_tx_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
>>>>  	struct cpsw_priv *priv = dev_id;
>>>>  
>>>>  	cpdma_ctlr_eoi(priv->dma, CPDMA_EOI_TX);
>>>> -	cpdma_chan_process(priv->txch, 128);
>>>> +	writel(0, &priv->wr_regs->tx_en);
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (netif_running(priv->ndev)) {
>>>> +		napi_schedule(&priv->napi_tx);
>>>> +		return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>> +	}
>>>
>>>
>>> cpsw_ndo_stop calls napi_disable: you can remove netif_running.
>>>
>>
>> This netif_running check is to find which interface is up as the
>> interrupt is shared by both the interfaces. When first interface is down
>> and second interface is active then napi_schedule for first interface
>> will fail and second interface napi needs to be scheduled.
>>
>> So I don't think netif_running needs to be removed.
> 
> Each interface has its own napi tx (resp. rx) context: I would had expected
> two unconditional napi_schedule per tx (resp. rx) shared irq, not one.
> 
> I'll read it again after some sleep.
> 

For each interrupt only one napi will be scheduled, when the first
interface is down then only second interface napi is scheduled in both
tx and rx irqs.

Regards
Mugunthan V N
--
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