[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAG+wggY=5BWaDujaiP6hnD5vTsXiOBNqBDYnqjEW_F4fdaMOyw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 01:43:32 -0500
From: Ming Chen <v.mingchen@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Erez Zadok <ezk@....cs.sunysb.edu>,
Dean Hildebrand <dhildeb@...ibm.com>,
Geoff Kuenning <geoff@...hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: [BUG?] ixgbe: only num_online_cpus() of the tx queues are enabled
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>
> You do not need multiqueue to send traffic for few TCP flows, because
> packets will reach 64KB size very fast.
I am trying to experiment using only one queue for all the TCP flows.
But, how do we force that. I was thinking about XPS. But I just
realized that /sys/class/net/p3p1/queues/tx-n/xps_cpus only set which
CPUs can use them. How to let all CPUs choose one single tx queue? Or,
should I use mqprio and assign all flows to one tc that contains only
one tx queue?
>
> If you want fairness, then multiqueue wont do it, unless you add some
> kind of shaper.
>
> TCP is handling one flow, not an arbitrary number of flows.
>
> If you need fairness, then you need an AQM like FQ.
>
Yeah. You are right. However, if we really want fairness while using
mq, then should AQM and FQ be aware of mq or even the scheduling of
the queues?
Best,
Ming
--
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