Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 net-next 2/7] net: add low latency socket poll

From: Eliezer Tamir <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:46:34 +0300

On 05/06/2013 18:39, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 18:30 +0300, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
>> On 05/06/2013 18:21, Eric Dumazet wrote:

>>> It would also make sense to give end_time as a parameter, so that the
>>> polling() code could really give  a end_time for the whole duration of
>>> poll().
>>>
>>> (You then should test can_poll_ll(end_time) _before_ call to
>>> ndo_ll_poll())
>>
>> how would you handle a nonblocking operation in that case?
>> I guess if we have a socket option, then we don't need to handle none
>> blocking any diffrent, since the user specified exactly how much time to
>> waste polling. right?
>
> If the thread already spent 50us in the poll() system call, it for sure
> should not call any ndo_ll_poll(). This makes no more sense at this
> point.

what about a non-blocking read from a socket?
Right now we assume this means poll only once since the application will 
repeat as needed.

maybe add a "once" parameter that will cause sk_poll_ll() to ignore end 
time and only try once?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations
2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services
3. A single system of record for all IT processes
http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel&#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired