On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 13:47:24 -0600 Jens Axboe wrote: > On 3/26/22 1:28 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 15:59:16 -0600 Jens Axboe wrote: > >> - Support for NAPI on sockets (Olivier) > > > > Were we CCed on these patches? I don't remember seeing them, > > and looks like looks like it's inventing it's own constants > > instead of using the config APIs we have. > > Don't know if it was ever posted on the netdev list Hm, maybe I don't understand how things are supposed to work. I'm surprised you're unfazed. > but the patches have been discussed for 6-9 months on the io_uring > list. You may need explain to me how that's relevant :) The point is the networking maintainers have not seen it. > Which constants are you referring to? Only odd one I see is > NAPI_TIMEOUT, other ones are using the sysctl bits. If we're > missing something here, do speak up and we'll make sure it's > consistent with the regular NAPI. SO_BUSY_POLL_BUDGET, 8 is quite low for many practical uses. I'd also like to have a conversation about continuing to use the socket as a proxy for NAPI_ID, NAPI_ID is exposed to user space now. io_uring being a new interface I wonder if it's not better to let the user specify the request parameters directly. > Adding Olivier who wrote the NAPI support. >
