Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20070824.144711.18301866.davem@davemloft.net>
To: jchapman@katalix.com
Cc: shemminger@linux-foundation.org, ossthema@de.ibm.com, akepner@sgi.com,
       netdev@vger.kernel.org, raisch@de.ibm.com, themann@de.ibm.com,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, meder@de.ibm.com,
       tklein@de.ibm.com, stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <46CF127D.1090609@katalix.com>
References: <200708241747.16592.ossthema@de.ibm.com>
	<20070824085203.42f4305c@freepuppy.rosehill.hemminger.net>
	<46CF127D.1090609@katalix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 915
Lines: 21

From: James Chapman <jchapman@katalix.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:16:45 +0100

> Does hardware interrupt mitigation really interact well with NAPI?

It interacts quite excellently.

There was a long saga about this with tg3 and huge SGI numa
systems with large costs for interrupt processing, and the
fix was to do a minimal amount of interrupt mitigation and
this basically cleared up all the problems.

Someone should reference that thread _now_ before this discussion goes
too far and we repeat a lot of information and people like myself have
to stay up all night correcting the misinformation and
misunderstandings that are basically guarenteed for this topic :)
-
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/