[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110406183318.GA6825@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:33:18 -0400
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, pekkas@...core.fi, jmorris@...ei.org,
yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net, therbert@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: Enable RFS sk_rxhash tracking for ipv6 sockets
On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 08:23:08PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le mercredi 06 avril 2011 à 11:17 -0700, David Miller a écrit :
> > From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> > Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:07:33 +0200
> >
> > > This is why we used on ipv4 :
> > >
> > > if (inet_sk(sk)->inet_daddr)
> > > sock_rps_save_rxhash(sk, skb->rxhash);
> > >
> > >
> > > Only arm RFS on UDP if socket is bound to a given remote peer.
> >
> > Agreed, Neil please make this change to your ipv6 code.
>
>
> BTW, do you guys know if NFS is using RFS right now (if TCP transport is
> used) ?
>
Thats kind of a tricky question, are you referring to clients or servers? Both
should be able to use RFS as Dave notes, but since sockets in NFS clients tend to be per
mount, rather than per application (as RFS nominally expects when doing flow
steering), theres likely to be some conflict in where RFS decides to steer
packets for that NFS socket as different applications on different cpus make
use of the same socket.
Neil
>
>
>
--
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