Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 05:41:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 05:40:52 -0400 Received: from chiara.elte.hu ([157.181.150.200]:50183 "HELO chiara.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 05:40:43 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 11:38:39 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: To: jamal Cc: , Alexey Kuznetsov , Robert Olsson , Benjamin LaHaise , , Linus Torvalds , Alan Cox Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, jamal wrote: > This already is done in the current NAPI patch which you should have > seen by now. [...] (i searched the web and mailing list archives and havent found it (in fact this is the first mention i saw) - could you give me a link so i can take a look at it? I just found your slides but no link to actual code. Thanks!) but the objectives, judging from the description you gave, are i think largely orthogonal, with some overlapping in the polling part. The polling part of my patch is just a few quick lines here and there and it's not intrusive at all. I needed it to make sure all problems are solved and that the system & network is actually usable in overload situations. you i think are concentrating on router performance (i'd add dedicated networking appliances to the list), using cooperative drivers. I trying to solve a DoS attack against 2.4 boxes, and i'm trying to guarantee the uninterrupted (pun unintended) functioning of the system from the point of the IRQ handler code. Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/