[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1327844561.2911.5.camel@leeds.uk.xensource.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 13:42:41 +0000
From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC: <wei.liu2@...rix.com>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"David Vrabel" <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2] New Xen netback implementation
On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 19:22 +0000, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 01:46:56PM +0000, Wei Liu wrote:
> > A new netback implementation which includes three major features:
> >
> > - Global page pool support
> > - NAPI + kthread 1:1 model
> > - Netback internal name changes
> >
> > Changes in V2:
> > - Fix minor bugs in V1
> > - Embed pending_tx_info into page pool
> > - Per-cpu scratch space
> > - Notification code path clean up
> >
> > This patch series is the foundation of furture work. So it is better
> > to get it right first. Patch 1 and 3 have the real meat.
>
> I've been playing with these patches and couple of things
> came to my mind:
> - would it make sense to also register to the shrinker API? This way
> if the host is running low on memory it can squeeze it out of the
> pool code. Perhaps a future TODO..
> - I like the pool code. I was thinking that perhaps (in the future)
> it could be used by blkback as well, as it runs into "not enought
> request structure" with the default setting. And making this dynamic
> would be pretty sweet.
Interesting thoughts worth adding to TODO list. But I'm focusing on
multi-page ring support and split event channel at the moment, which
should help improve performance on 10G network. Hopefully I can submit
RFC patch V3 in a few days. ;-)
> - This patch set solves the CPU banding problem I've seen with the
> older netback. The older one I could see X netback threads eating 80%
> of CPU. With this one, the number is down to 13-14%.
>
> So you can definitly stick 'Tested-by: Konrad.." on them. And definitly
> Reviewed-by on the first two - hadn't had a chance to look at the rest.
>
Thanks for your extensive test and review.
Wei.
--
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