From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep 25 20:48:45 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02B17106564A;
	Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:48:45 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from vijju.singh@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com (mail-ey0-f182.google.com
	[209.85.215.182])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AEA08FC12;
	Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:48:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by eaac10 with SMTP id c10so1184888eaa.13
	for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	bh=rYVQPbGmTEr8QdpFhbaMy/Qyt1bQbZ0iS1O3TjkBISY=;
	b=UfZhf8jTMW/PVX5hyLixw5KT9R6M6fXETbkEccUNQKD7LYUxxFGt7rTjpBbU0i+YvS
	oNFEcWiEMEhokqLMNkGOiXVtJFvYYPfvyXXHSF+DO7FKb1aUV7UFfv+Lc0T0kKiFli8w
	Eu1VHEy9hA5RK4wFntIM3Lbz5xM+xJ5v//gwGTnrR3RHzi/SKJ9Fg84tEqanFSXZcWlY
	b61slgvxOxk3vkhnid9m9xBf7EF99oWCYRWHlgHMPb39zBr3RUmCm/eePRPzTeyDN3oE
	TnBmIIKUDkKx/h7Jc/ffwz+2Sei1I4LKJigeJxij9k2nM3aepYz0STqbAWaHMLzWDjqG
	ofCQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.14.203.73 with SMTP id e49mr22443723eeo.27.1348606123329; Tue,
	25 Sep 2012 13:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.14.219.134 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAFOYbcmuxBmOfC6P0UBG5RR7xJy_i5mTr2NGMRcTJEJrQmjQ_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALCNsJSSQSWV7vNVR-Sn8CPDKbUBBLpSH0b-HYMJo3SXvkOY=w@mail.gmail.com>
	<201208161736.47250.jhb@freebsd.org>
	<CAFOYbc=bXv_V4egO94ftkTFoLQ2uM50Sw3X5kgYoyKQcd0s31A@mail.gmail.com>
	<201208170941.54482.jhb@freebsd.org>
	<CALCNsJQ740ceDzpd5n7QAALn-uJ-GdWxPTkQJuMJUMTUGJjOUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFOYbcmuxBmOfC6P0UBG5RR7xJy_i5mTr2NGMRcTJEJrQmjQ_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:48:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CALCNsJQkLdEMkCUfp00woGbf-uUCOQVt5mJuZfrRTw9PRGYM9w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vijay Singh <vijju.singh@gmail.com>
To: Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: ixgbe rx & tx locks
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:48:45 -0000

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ah yes, at one time I was keeping the RX side lock when calling the stack,
> but then as I recall that had problems, so the code now releases and
> reaquires
> as you can see. It results in some contention but I'm not sure that's
> avoidable.

Jack, I am wondering if this could be avoided if we can avoid to
enqueue the task OR re-enable interrupts if the other one is already
scheduled. Is this possible?