Re: Re: LLTX and netif_stop_queue
From: Stephen Hemminger <hidden>
Date: 2005-01-19 23:18:53
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:47:11 -0800 "David S. Miller" [off-list ref] wrote:
On 03 Jan 2005 23:18:14 -0500 jamal [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, 2005-01-03 at 12:12, Grant Grundler wrote:quoted
Some workloads that Jamal cares about (routing) only need 2 cpus.What bothers me is more the complexity this has introduced more than the workload. OTOH, 1-2% improvement posted by Roland is good justification.I think I'm going to put in something like Eric's patch and fix up the other LLTX drivers as per his sungem patch. There is a part of me that does want to yank LLTX for non-loopback out of the tree.
Wondering, why not just have the drivers have a way to lock dev->queue_lock in the interrupt handler, and change the xmit to do spin_lock_irqsave? Any driver that assumes it is being called with irq's enabled in transmit is probably already busted anyway. -- Stephen Hemminger [off-list ref]