Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/3] netpoll api

On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 04:02:09PM -0400, jamal wrote:

On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 15:11, Matt Mackall wrote:

quoted

quoted

Nice.
Is the ethernet card in a case like this almost dedicated for this
kind of work?

No, I've had good results with it as the only interface to the
machine. As netpoll traffic is fairly infrequent, performance seems
little affected.

Ok, I suppose if you are running some serious server you wont be
debugging either. Did i understand correctly that no netpoll trafic
translates to a device being removed from the poll list? i.e only when
theres traffic to send for example would the controller be invoked? 

Polling is only on demand. Eg, in the netconsole case, polling only
happens to push a packet out when a printk occurs. In the netdump or
kgdb case, the entire machine is essentially brought to a halt anyway,
so overhead is irrelevant.
 

quoted

quoted

Is disable_irq() in the controller safe for shared irqs? Or maybe this
is critical enough that you dont care?

I'm not aware of any issues there. I understand Red Hat has banged on
this piece pretty heavily recently for their AS kernel. 

Lets say you have a vga card and ethernet sharing the same irq and doing
a lot of debugging ... would disabling that shared irq kill the display
for example? 

Yes. Again, in the netconsole case, this will only happen when a
printk is occurring. Netconsole is primarily of interest for debugging
or replacing serial console for headless servers. In the 'replacing
serial console' case, it actually reduces overhead because polling the
network is much faster than polling serial.

quoted

quoted

Its a little wasteful to call the controller when there are is no work
to be done; we have found in NAPI that any extra PCI transactions cost.
(some IBM people doing benchmarking have complained about specweb not
looking good where NAPI will have one extra PCI transaction per packet.
You do it twice the rate NAPI would do it at low speeds).
Again, the answer maybe who cares, this is critical work.

Just to be sure you read this right, the poll method (NAPI) is
different from poll_controller (netpoll). The name is unfortunate, but
it's what Ingo had in his early 2.4 netconsole patches. I could
s/poll_controller/netpoll/ perhaps.

Actually the name is proper since polling is involved. I can see the
confusion with NAPI - so from that angle changing it to something
more descriptive of its function rather than how it achieves it would
help.

Ok, netpoll it is.

-- 
Matt Mackall : http://www.selenic.com : of or relating to the moon