On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 01:46:40PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:34:31 -0400 > > > Linas Vepstas wrote: > > > I was under the impression that NAPI was for the receive side only. > > > > That depends on the driver implementation. > > What Jeff is trying to say is that TX reclaim can occur in > the NAPI poll routine, and in fact this is what the vast > majority of NAPI drivers do.
I'll experiment with this. When doing, say, an ftp, there are enough TCP ack packets coming back to have NAPI netdev->poll be called frequently enough? > implied. In fact, I get the impression that spidernet is limited > in some way and that's where all the strange approaches are coming > from :) Hmm. Or maybe I'm just getting old. Once upon a time, low watermarks were considered the "best" way of doing anything; never occurred to me it would be considered "strange". Based on my probably obsolete idea of what constitutes "slick hardware", I was actually impressed by what the spidernet could do. Aside from cleaning up the transmit ring in the receive poll loop, what would be the not-so-strange way of doing things? --linas - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
