Re: What's the benefit of large Rx rings?

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Yuval Mintz wrote: >>> This might be a dumb question, but I recently touched this >>> and felt like I'm missing something basic - >>> >>> NAPI is being scheduled from soft-interrupt contex, and it >>> has a ~strict quota for handling Rx

RE: What's the benefit of large Rx rings?

From: Yuval Mintz > Sent: 22 November 2015 20:19 > This might be a dumb question, but I recently touched this > and felt like I'm missing something basic - > > NAPI is being scheduled from soft-interrupt contex, and it > has a ~strict quota for handling Rx packets [even though we're > allowing

Re: What's the benefit of large Rx rings?

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 07:16:25AM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Yuval Mintz wrote: > >>> This might be a dumb question, but I recently touched this > >>> and felt like I'm missing something basic - > >>> > >>> NAPI is being scheduled

Re: What's the benefit of large Rx rings?

>> This might be a dumb question, but I recently touched this >> and felt like I'm missing something basic - >> >> NAPI is being scheduled from soft-interrupt contex, and it >> has a ~strict quota for handling Rx packets [even though we're >> allowing practically unlimited handling of Tx

What's the benefit of large Rx rings?

Hi, This might be a dumb question, but I recently touched this and felt like I'm missing something basic - NAPI is being scheduled from soft-interrupt contex, and it has a ~strict quota for handling Rx packets [even though we're allowing practically unlimited handling of Tx completions]. Given

Re: What's the benefit of large Rx rings?

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Yuval Mintz wrote: > Hi, > > This might be a dumb question, but I recently touched this > and felt like I'm missing something basic - > > NAPI is being scheduled from soft-interrupt contex, and it > has a ~strict quota for handling Rx