[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F07712C237BE@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 13:55:47 +0000
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"gorcunov@...nvz.org" <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Alex Duyck <aduyck@...antis.com>,
Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
David Decotigny <decot@...glers.com>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"rdunlap@...radead.org" <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
"andi@...stfloor.org" <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC V2 PATCH 17/25] net/netpolicy: introduce
netpolicy_pick_queue
>
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 12:36 PM, <kan.liang@...el.com> wrote:
> > From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
> >
> > To achieve better network performance, the key step is to distribute
> > the packets to dedicated queues according to policy and system run
> > time status.
> >
> > This patch provides an interface which can return the proper dedicated
> > queue for socket/task. Then the packets of the socket/task will be
> > redirect to the dedicated queue for better network performance.
> >
> > For selecting the proper queue, currently it uses round-robin
> > algorithm to find the available object from the given policy object
> > list. The algorithm is good enough for now. But it could be improved
> > by some adaptive algorithm later.
> >
> Seriously? You want to all of this code so we revert to TX queue selection by
> round robin?
>
I agree that the round robin is not an optimal algorithm.
For this series, we intends to provide a generic infrastructure for review.
For the algorithm parts, it's already in our TODO list. We will replace it later.
Thanks,
Kan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists