Re: [PATCH v5] net: ethernet: add driver for Aurora VLSI NB8800 Ethernet controller

[Måns Rullgård]

David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> From: Måns Rullgård <mans@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 00:40:09 +0000
>
>> When the DMA complete interrupt arrives, the next chain should be
>> kicked off as quickly as possible, and I don't see why that would
>> benefit from being done in napi context.
>
> NAPI isn't about low latency, it's about fairness and interrupt
> mitigation.
>
> You probably don't even realize that all of the TX SKB freeing you do
> in the hardware interrupt handler end up being actually processed by a
> scheduled software interrupt anyways.
>
> So you are gaining almost nothing by not doing TX completion in NAPI
> context, whereas by doing so you would be gaining a lot including
> more simplified locking or even the ability to do no locking at all.

TX completion is separate from restarting the DMA, and moving that to
NAPI may well be a good idea.  Should I simply napi_schedule() if the
hardware indicates TX is complete and do the cleanup in the NAPI poll
function?

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mans@xxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/