[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1254957748.2519.14.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:22:28 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Andrew Grover <andy.grover@...il.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: using huge numbers of queues
On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 14:59 -0700, Andrew Grover wrote:
> Hi Herbert,
>
> At NetConf, you made a passing remark about wanting lots of queues,
> even 1-per-socket. Have you thought further about how we would use so
> many?
>
> Thinking about this reminded me of VJ's 2006 netchannel concept, which
> although not adopted, was pretty interesting. Would having 1 queue per
> socket (or at least 1 per process) and hw that is able to filter
> individual flows (I think the Intel 82599 can do this now for up to
> 128) perhaps make netchannels workable? At least this would get all
> processing out of int/bh and into process context, if not userspace,
> no?
Solarflare controllers already support 1000+ queues. The OpenOnload
software <http://www.openonload.org> assigns one queue per process
(though this isn't quite 1:1 as sockets may be shared between processes)
and almost all protocol processing is done in user-space. I'm not sure
quite how close this is to the netchannels concept.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists