On 05/23/2011 08:21 AM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: [...]
> In 'real world' CAN setups you'll never see 21.000 CAN frames per second (and > therefore 21.000 irqs/s) - you are usually designing CAN network traffic with > less than 60% busload. So interrupt rates somewhere below 1000 irqs/s can be > assumed. > > From what i've seen so far a 3-4 messages rx FIFO and NAPI support just make > it. > > @Marc/Wolfgang: Would this be also your recommendation for a CAN controller > design that supports SocketCAN in the best way? If you have a rx FIFO NAPI is the way to go. For a single mailbox it adds overhead, if you can read the CAN frame in the interrupt handler. The error messages should probably generated from NAPI, too. Especially the I'm-the-only-CAN-node-on-the-net-and-get-no-ACK error message. However IIRC David said that every new driver should implement NAPI. > As the Linux network stack supports hardware timestamps too, this could be an > additional (optional!) feature. regards, Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de |
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
