On Mon, 1 Oct 2001, Ben Greear wrote:
> So, when you turn off the IRQs, are the drivers somehow made aware of
> this so that they can go into polling mode? That might fix the 10ms
> latency/starvation problem that bothers me...
the latest, -D9 patch does this. If drivers provide a (backwards
compatible) ->poll_controller() call then they can be polled by kpolld.
There are also a few points within the networking code that trigger a poll
pass, to make sure events are processed even if networking-intensive
applications take away all CPU time from kpolld. The device is only polled
if the IRQ is detected to be in overload mode. IRQ-overload protection
does not depend on the existence of the availability of the
->poll_controller(). The poll_controller() call is very simple for most
drivers. (It has to be per-driver, because not all drivers advance their
state purely via their device interrupts.)
but kpolld itself and auto-mitigation is not limited to networking - any
other driver framework that has high-irq-load problems can use it.
> I'm more worried about dropped pkts. If you can receive 10k packets
> per second, then you can receive (lose) 100 packets in 10ms....
yep - this does not happen anymore, at least under the loads i tested
which otherwise choke a purely irq-driven machine. (It will happen in a
gradual way if load is increased further, but that is natural.)
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 07 2001 - 21:00:26 EST