[PATCH 1/2]: powerpc/cell spidernet bottom half
David Miller
davem at davemloft.net
Thu Aug 17 09:32:52 EST 2006
From: linas at austin.ibm.com (Linas Vepstas)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:30:28 -0500
> Why would you want o do this? It seems like a cruddier strategy
> than what we can already do (which is to never get an transmit
> interrupt, as long as the kernel can shove data into the device fast
> enough to keep the queue from going empty.) The whole *point* of a
> low-watermark interrupt is to never have to actually get the interrupt,
> if the rest of the system is on its toes and is supplying data fast
> enough.
As long as TX packets get freed within a certain latency
boundary, this kind of scheme should be fine.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list