Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:21:09 -0700
From:      Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>
To:        Vijay Singh <vijju.singh@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: ixgbe rx & tx locks
Message-ID:  <CAFOYbck=64JLytSLqeUaOhn70pBaNDPHBVY2T3b90RXMyK0%2BRA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALCNsJRR_=HqRWUduDk2GPKcnSgaHky4ybTjUa_BXfwcA3W88g@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> <CALCNsJQkLdEMkCUfp00woGbf-uUCOQVt5mJuZfrRTw9PRGYM9w@mail.gmail.com> <CALCNsJRR_=HqRWUduDk2GPKcnSgaHky4ybTjUa_BXfwcA3W88g@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Vijay Singh <vijju.singh@gmail.com> wrote:

> > 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?
>
> It seems to me that ixgbe_handle_que() should only be doing
> ixgbe_rxeof(). When ever mq_start() is unable to send, it enqueues the
> new txq_task. Also, this is checked periodically from the timer
> function as well. I will try an experiment to evaluate only more_rx in
> ixgbe_msix_que() and change ixgbe_handle_que() to do rx processing
> only. I will report back findings.
>
> Meanwhile it its immediately obvious to anyone what this will break,
> please let me know.
>
> -vijay
>

OK, will be interested in the results.

Jack



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFOYbck=64JLytSLqeUaOhn70pBaNDPHBVY2T3b90RXMyK0%2BRA>