On 27/02/2013 23:42, Ben Greear wrote: > On 02/27/2013 12:40 PM, Eliezer Tamir wrote: >> On 27/02/2013 21:58, Rick Jones wrote: >>> On 02/27/2013 09:55 AM, Eliezer Tamir wrote: >>>> *rx-usecs=0 is usually not useful in a production environment. >>> >>> I would think that latency-sensitive folks would be using rx-usecs=0 in >>> production - at least if the NIC in use didn't have low enough latency >>> with its default interrupt coalescing/avoidance heuristics. >> >> It will only work well if you have no bulk traffic on the same port as >> the low latency traffic at all. > > Have you done any tests for bulk throughput with busy-poll? Yes, it > will eat a core, > but that might be worth it in some cases if there was significant > throughput increase...
My impression was that most bulk use cases are handled exceptionally well by napi along with some kind of adaptive moderation scheme, esp. if you compare to cases where napi is not being used. If you can recommend a specific use case where busy polling will be an advantage for bulk traffic, I will happily try it out. Thanks, Eliezer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
