Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 08:35:53 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Cc: Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>, Vijay Singh <vijju.singh@gmail.com> Subject: Re: ixgbe rx & tx locks Message-ID: <201208160835.53303.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAFOYbcm7nzKA3ZR9F8fVLY2Q4839FDOC61PNjwNpQy1WBxL1Hw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CALCNsJSSQSWV7vNVR-Sn8CPDKbUBBLpSH0b-HYMJo3SXvkOY=w@mail.gmail.com> <CAFOYbc=i=59hXDUUyac4JORw-189=LHqXzNF8XKZh3Zwdm7tdA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFOYbcm7nzKA3ZR9F8fVLY2Q4839FDOC61PNjwNpQy1WBxL1Hw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, August 13, 2012 6:17:53 pm Jack Vogel wrote: > After looking at the code again I think this is just what's happening, > mq_start > will schedule the task when it can't get the lock (due to the interrupt > already > holding it presumeably), so you get the tasklet code in contention with the > interrupt. > > Anyone with a clever notion of how to do things better? Are you queueing a task that does both RX and TX? That was a bug I fixed in igb that caused out-of-order packet processing for RX with igb. igb uses a smaller task for when it's start routine fails that only tries to restart transmission but doesn't do fullblown interrupt handling. Here's a possible patch (compiles, not run-tested) to implement this for ixgbe: http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/ixgbe_txq_task.patch -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201208160835.53303.jhb>