Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:09:05 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: scottl@freebsd.org Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: usb with fast interrupts Message-ID: <20041112.150905.105578119.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <41952FBD.40602@freebsd.org> References: <20041112.143439.33211003.imp@bsdimp.com> <41952FBD.40602@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <41952FBD.40602@freebsd.org>
Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > Our usb system supports soft interrupts, but we currently don't make
: > productive use of them. The following makes interrupts fast
: > interrupts and uses taskqueues to queue data to a SWI.
: >
: > Lemme know if it works for you.
: >
: > Warner
: >
:
: Taskqueues aren't good for timing-sensitive operations. Even though USB
: may not be terribly sensitive, I bet you'll actually see performance
: drops with things like umass with this. Could you instead just put the
: real handler into a kthread and wake it up, or use a swi?
I'll have to measure, but I've not seen my umass get any slower with
this patch... I can't use a SWI, because there's no way to turn off
an SWI once you've created it (and I think you'd said you were opposed
to creating a SWI cleanup function). I'm not sure how a kthread would
be any faster, however, since both a taskqueue and a thread have to go
through a scheduling point.
A quick test here seems to point out a bug in da:
sudo dd if=/dev/da0 of=/dev/null
^C5275+0 records in
5275+0 records out
2700800 bytes transferred in 26.385502 secs (102359 bytes/sec)
3:06pm hammer:[68]> dmesg | egrep da
da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
da0: <Sony MSC-U04 3.00> Removable Direct Access SCSI-0 device
da0: 3MB (7904 512 byte sectors: 64H 32S/T 3C)
Hmmm, how can I read more than 3MB from da0? I'll have to check to
see how fast it is w/o this change.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041112.150905.105578119.imp>