From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763326AbXH0Uht (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:37:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759654AbXH0UhY (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:37:24 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:39978 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758100AbXH0UhX (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:37:23 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20070827.133721.59473971.davem@davemloft.net> To: ossthema@de.ibm.com Cc: jchapman@katalix.com, shemminger@linux-foundation.org, akepner@sgi.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, raisch@de.ibm.com, themann@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, meder@de.ibm.com, tklein@de.ibm.com, stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com Subject: Re: RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <200708271147.01890.ossthema@de.ibm.com> References: <46D1D634.7060007@katalix.com> <20070826.185815.93042514.davem@davemloft.net> <200708271147.01890.ossthema@de.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.1.52 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Jan-Bernd Themann Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:47:01 +0200 > So the question is simply: Do we want drivers that need (benefit > from) a timer based polling support to implement their own timers > each, or should there be a generic support? I'm trying to figure out how an hrtimer implementation would even work. Would you start the timer from the chip interrupt handler? If so, that's taking two steps backwards as you've already taken all of the overhead of running the interrupt handler.