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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:08:01 -0700 From: Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com> To: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com> Cc: "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>, Amritha Nambiar <amritha.nambiar@...el.com>, Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@...el.com>, Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: ADQ - comparison to aRFS, clarifications on NAPI ID, binding with busy-polling On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 12:48:06PM +0000, Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote: > Thanks a lot for your reply! It was really helpful. I have a few > comments, please see below. > > On 2020-06-24 23:21, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > > > ADQ also provides 2 levels of filtering compared to aRFS+XPS. The first > > level of filtering selects a queue-set associated with the application > > and the second level filter or RSS will select a queue within that queue > > set associated with an app thread. > > This difference looks important. So, ADQ reserves a dedicated set of > queues solely for the application use. I wanted to break this out as it looks like the most interesting part. There are several use cases where the application needs to have its packets arrive on a specific queue (or queue set): AF_XDP, and other zero-copy work. Having the app bind to a napi_id doesn't seem to provide the same functionality. > Ethtool RSS context API (look for "context" in man ethtool) seems more > appropriate for the RX side for this purpose. Agreed. -- Jonathan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists