On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Ben Greear wrote:
> So, couldn't your NAPI patch be used by drivers that are updated, and
> let Ingo's patch be a catch-all for un-fixed drivers? As we move
> foward, more and more drivers support your version, and Ingo's patch
> becomes less utilized. So long as the patches are tuned such that
> yours keeps Ingo's from being triggered on devices you support, there
> should be no real conflict, eh?
exactly. auto-mitigation will not hurt NAPI-enabled devices the least.
Also, auto-mitigation is device-independent.
perhaps Jamal misunderstood the nature of my patch, so i'd like to state
it again: auto-mitigation is a feature that is not triggered normally. I
did a quick hack yesterday to include kpolld - that was a mistake, i was
wrong, and i've removed it. kpolld was mostly an experiment to prove that
TCP network connections can be fully functional during extreme overload
situations as well. Also, auto-mitigation will be a nice mechanizm to make
people more aware of the NAPI patch: if they ever notice 'Possible IRQ
overload:' messages then they can be told to try the NAPI patches.
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 - 21:00:28 EST