From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 1 May 2002 18:16:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 1 May 2002 18:15:59 -0400 Received: from jffdns02.or.intel.com ([134.134.248.4]:22747 "EHLO hebe.or.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 1 May 2002 18:15:59 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Leech, Christopher" To: "'Steffen Persvold'" , "Linux-Kernel (linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org)" Subject: RE: Plan for e100-e1000 in mainline Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 15:15:44 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Another funny thing is that the latency for the gigabit > adapter (e1000) is also higher than fast ethernet (eepro100) > with small messages (<256 bytes) : You could try setting the RxIntDelay module parameter to 0, that should improve round trip latency. The balance between latency on the receive path and interrupt rate can be difficult to manage, hopefully a dynamic method like NAPI will result in Ethernet drivers that need less hand tuning. -- Chris Leech Network Software Engineer LAN Access Division, Intel Corporation