[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202212061348121276979@zte.com.cn>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 13:48:12 +0800 (CST)
From: <yang.yang29@....com.cn>
To: <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: <kuba@...nel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
<bigeasy@...utronix.de>, <imagedong@...cent.com>,
<kuniyu@...zon.com>, <petrm@...dia.com>, <liu3101@...due.edu>,
<wujianguo@...natelecom.cn>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next v2] net: record times of netdev_budget exhausted
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 11:18 AM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com,> wrote:
> Yes, and if we really want to track all these kinds of events the
> break caused by need_resched() in do_softirq would
> also need some monitoring.
I think this situation is a bit different. The break caused by
need_resched() in __do_softirq() is some kind of internal
events, kernel hacker may track it by something like tracepoint.
But netdev_budget* are sysctl for administrator, when
administrator adjust them, they may want to see the
effect in a direct or easy way.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists