Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:21:50 +0300 From: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org, John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> Subject: Re: Changes in the network interface queueing handoff model Message-ID: <44CE3C2E.80007@he.iki.fi> In-Reply-To: <20060731180643.E71432@fledge.watson.org> References: <XFMail.20060731100533.jdp@polstra.com> <20060731180643.E71432@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote: > > I tend to agree, but implemented full queueing support for if_em to > make sure I understood to complexity implications of completely > removing queueing from the ifnet side dispatch. I guess an > interesting question for us is how we decide what the right threshold > is to implement software queuing. Do any if_em cards need software > queueing, or do they all have adequate in-hardware queues as is? > Entirely cutting the queue code would significantly simplify > em_startmbuf. Actually most em cards support 4096 descriptors each way. Pete
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44CE3C2E.80007>