Home » Mailing list archives » linux-kernel » 2007 » October » 7

Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
[view in full thread]
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...>
Cc: <netdev@...>, Ayaz Abdulla <aabdulla@...>, LKML <linux-kernel@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing
Date: Sunday, October 7, 2007 - 5:08 am

* Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:


/me agrees violently

btw., when i played with this tunable under -rt:

 enum {
         NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT,
         NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_CPU
 };
 static int optimization_mode = NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT;

the MODE_CPU one gave (much) _higher_ bandwidth. The queueing model in 
forcedeth seemed to be not that robust and i think a single queueing 
model should be adopted instead of this tunable. (which i think just hid 
some bug/dependency) But i never got to the bottom of it so it's just 
the impression i got.

	Ingo
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
Messages in current thread:
[PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing, Jeff Garzik, (Sat Oct 6, 11:12 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for test..., Jeff Garzik, (Sun Oct 7, 10:47 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for test..., Yinghai Lu, (Sun Oct 7, 3:39 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for test..., Jeff Garzik, (Sun Oct 7, 4:05 pm)
[PATCH 6/n] forcedeth: protect slow path with mutex, Jeff Garzik, (Sun Oct 7, 7:23 am)
Re: [PATCH 6/n] forcedeth: protect slow path with mutex, Jeff Garzik, (Sun Oct 7, 10:40 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for test..., Ingo Molnar, (Sun Oct 7, 5:08 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for test..., Jeff Garzik, (Sun Oct 7, 7:34 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for test..., Jeff Garzik, (Sat Oct 6, 11:24 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for test..., Jeff Garzik, (Sat Oct 6, 11:17 am)
[PATCH 5/5] forcedeth: timer overhaul, Jeff Garzik, (Sat Oct 6, 11:15 am)
[PATCH 4/5] forcedeth: internal simplification and cleanups, Jeff Garzik, (Sat Oct 6, 11:14 am)
[PATCH 3/5] forcedeth: process TX completions using NAPI, Jeff Garzik, (Sat Oct 6, 11:14 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/5] forcedeth: process TX completions using NAPI, Jeff Garzik, (Sun Oct 7, 10:39 am)
[PATCH 2/5] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup, Jeff Garzik, (Sat Oct 6, 11:14 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/5] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup, Ingo Molnar, (Sun Oct 7, 5:03 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/5] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup, Yinghai Lu, (Sun Oct 7, 12:43 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/5] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup, Jeff Garzik, (Sun Oct 7, 7:40 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/5] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup, Yinghai Lu, (Sun Oct 7, 3:36 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/5] forcedeth: interrupt handling cleanup, Jeff Garzik, (Sun Oct 7, 4:07 pm)
[PATCH 1/5] forcedeth: make NAPI unconditional, Jeff Garzik, (Sat Oct 6, 11:13 am)