On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 12:03 AM, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The main reason why this implementation is different then the common networking devices > implementation (and kept separate) is that in my mind at least, network devices are different > animals than other I/O devices in the sense that: Oh, I see now that you do refer to the netdev library, I was confused by "In the networking stack, each device driver implements adaptive IRQ moderation on its own" comment. > (a) network devices rely heavily on byte count of raw ethernet frames for adaptive moderation > while in storage or I/O, the byte count is often a result of a submission/completion transaction > and sometimes even known only to the application on top of the infrastructure (like in the > rdma case). > (b) Performance characteristics and expectations in representative workloads. > (c) network devices collect all sort of stats for different functionalities (where adaptive moderation > is only one use-case) and I'm not sure at all that a subset of stats could easily migrate to a different > context. I think Tal has idea/s on how the existing library can be changed to support more modes/models -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
