Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
From:      John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>
To:        Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>
Cc:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: interrupt latency and driver locking
Message-ID:  <XFMail.20030920130054.jdp@polstra.com>
In-Reply-To: <20030920100911.B55993@xorpc.icir.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 20-Sep-2003 Luigi Rizzo wrote:

> the main problem, as i see it, is that when there are PHY events you
> still need to do some expensive work while holding a lock that
> blocks interrupts, with very bad impact on the worst-case
> response of the system.

I agree that is a problem, but I don't think it is the main problem.
In a running system, PHY events essentially never happen, so it
doesn't matter much if they take a long time.  In other words, the PHY
really only needs attention when the link state changes, and for all
practical purposes that never happens in a running system.

What is killing us is the periodic polling of the PHY every second,
only to find out that nothing has changed.

John



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20030920130054.jdp>