lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 23 Jan 2014 08:40:36 +0800
From:	Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel@...il.com>
To:	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Cc:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Zhi Yong Wu <wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/3] virtio_net: add aRFS support

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com> wrote:
>>> 1. The aRFS interface for the guest to specify which virtual queue to
>>> receive a packet on is fairly straight forward.
>>> 2. To hook into RFS, we need to match the virtual queue to the real
>>> CPU it will processed on, and then program the RFS table for that flow
>>> and CPU.
>>> 3. NIC aRFS keys off the RFS tables so it can program the HW with the
>>> correct queue for the CPU.
>> Does anyone have time to make one conclusion for this discussion? in
>> particular, how will rx packet be steered up the stack from guest
>> virtio_net driver, virtio_net NIC, vhost_net, tun driver, host network
>> stack, to physical NIC with more details?
>> What is the role of each path units? otherwise this discussion wont
>> get any meanful result, which is not what we expect.
>>
> Working code outweighs theoretical discussion :-). I think you started
> on a good track with original patches, and I believe the tun path
> should work pretty well (some performance numbers would still be good
I planed to run netperf in one kvm guest with the path "vhost_net +
tun + OVS bridge". But it seems to be a bit difficult for me to get
some x86 hardwares. The boxes which i have all are Power arch.
> to validate). Seems like there's enough hooks in the virtio_net path
> to implement something meaningful and maybe get some numbers (maybe
Can you say what something meaningful is with more details? What is
the roadmap of virt_net aRFS support which you expect?
> ignore NIC aRFS in the first pass).
>
> Tom
>
>>>
>>>> Stefan
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Zhi Yong Wu



-- 
Regards,

Zhi Yong Wu
--
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