David S. Miller writes:
 > From: "Michael Chan" [off-list ref]
 > Subject: Re: [TG3]: Add hw coalescing infrastructure.
 > Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:17:36 -0700

 > > Yes, and MTU size dependent too. But we may not want to coalesce the
 > > same way when running at 10/100 Mbps. For example, if one packet has
 > > arrived, we don't want to wait 120 usec or 1200 usec to see if another
 > > packet will arrive before we interrupt at 100 and 10 Mbps respectively.
 > 
 > That's a good point.  I think it would be wise for us to try
 > and come up with a dynamic mitigation algorithm that is as MTU
 > and link speed agnostic as possible.

 Size of RX-ring is also to be taken to account. You probably have to design 
 for samllest packets otherwise you risk RX-ring overrun and packet drop. 

 > One thing to note is that what we're really trying to do is
 > maximize the amount of work done per interrupt, without
 > unduly adding latency to packet reception.
 > 
 > Work done per-interrupt, and maximum latency, are better goals
 > because formulas based upon those values will automatically take
 > differences in CPU and BUS I/O speed into account.

  Yes.

  Cheers.
					--ro