jamal wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 20:47 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
1) you need (a) well-designed hardware _and_ (b) a smart driver writer
to avoid bottlenecking on internal driver locks. As you can see we have
both (a) and (b) for tg3 ;-)
How about the following patch which fixes #b for e1000 ;->
I think the e1000s challenges are related to the gazillion variations of
boards they support and a little challenge of too many intel cooks.
Auke, why do you need the tx ring lock?
To prevent against multiple entries bumping head & tail at the same time as well
as overwriting the same entries in the tx ring (contention for
next_to_watch/next_to_clean)? It may be unlikely but ripping out the tx ring
lock might not be a good idea, perhaps after we get rid of LLTX in e1000?
to be honest: I'm open for ideas and I'll give it a try, but stuff like this
needs to go through some nasty stress testing (multiple clients, long time)
before I will consider it seriously, but fortunately that's something I can do.
Auke
-
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
