Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 10:58:42 -0700 From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_poll.c Message-ID: <431DD8D2.6020006@root.org> In-Reply-To: <431DCEFB.9030005@samsco.org> References: <200509051602.j85G2Bpo090258@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050905094341.A23343@xorpc.icir.org> <20050905180050.GB41863@cell.sick.ru> <20050905141451.A27290@xorpc.icir.org> <20050906061828.GQ41863@cell.sick.ru> <20050906012755.B34182@xorpc.icir.org> <20050906112608.N51625@fledge.watson.org> <431DC64E.9010903@root.org> <431DCEFB.9030005@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long wrote: > Nate Lawson wrote: >> For the case of storage, you actually have a better model since all >> transactions are initiated from the host (as opposed to packet >> arrivals). This gives an easy metric for a dynamic polling threshold >> -- if you have a deep queue of outstanding requests and one completes, >> you should poll a little more than normal. >> > > Except for target mode. Never heard of that before. -- Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?431DD8D2.6020006>