Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 21:12:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 21:12:39 -0400 Received: from shell.cyberus.ca ([209.195.95.7]:61624 "EHLO shell.cyberus.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 21:12:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 21:10:10 -0400 (EDT) From: jamal To: Benjamin LaHaise cc: , , , , , , Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 In-Reply-To: <20011003150355.A3780@redhat.com> 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 Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:53:58PM +0400, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote: > > Citing my old explanation: > > > > >"Polling" is not a real polling in fact, it just accepts irqs as > > >events waking rx softirq with blocking subsequent irqs. > > >Actual receive happens at softirq. > > > > > >Seems, this approach solves the worst half of livelock problem completely: > > >irqs are throttled and tuned to load automatically. > > >Well, and drivers become cleaner. > > Well, this sounds like a 2.5 patch. When do we get to merge it? It is backward compatible to 2.4 netif_rx() which means it can go in now. The problem is netdrivers that want to use the interface have to be morphed. As a general disclaimer, i really dont mean to put down Ingo's efforts i just think the irq mitigation idea as is now is wrong for both 2.4 and 2.5 cheers, jamal - 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/