[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231004154609.6007f1a0@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 15:46:09 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Wander Lairson Costa <hawk@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: Use SMP threads for backlog NAPI (or
optional).
On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 18:20:18 +0200 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> - Patch #2 has been removed. Removing the warning is still an option.
>
> - There are two patches in the series:
> - Patch #1 always creates backlog threads
> - Patch #2 creates the backlog threads if requested at boot time,
> mandatory on PREEMPT_RT.
> So it is either or and I wanted to show how both look like.
>
> - The kernel test robot reported a performance regression with
> loopback (stress-ng --udp X --udp-ops Y) against the RFC version.
> The regression is now avoided by using local-NAPI if backlog
> processing is requested on the local CPU.
Not what we asked for, and it doesn't apply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists