On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 13:44 -0700, David Miller wrote:

From: Christian Borntraeger <redacted>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:45:40 +0200

quoted

Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 schrieb Rusty Russell:

quoted

+static void receive_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb,

[...]

quoted

+	netif_rx(skb);

In the NAPI case, we should use netif_receive_skb, no?

NAPI doesn't make sense for virtual devices, my Sun LDOM nework
driver won't use NAPI either.

It's also too cumbersome to use NAPI with the way virtualized
network drivers work (multiple ports, each with an interrupt
source, not just one) until the NAPI split patches are ported
and applied upstream and that won't be for a while.

Dave, I think you're the only one (so far?) with multiple irqs.

It's not clear that guest-controlled interrupt mitigation is the best
approach for virtual devices, but at the moment it doesn't hurt.

Cheers,
Rusty.