On 07/21/2012 08:02 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 07/20/2012 03:40 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
- err = init_vqs(vi);
+ if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_NET_F_CTRL_VQ))
+ vi->has_cvq = true;
+
How about we disable multiqueue if there's no cvq?
Will make logic a bit simpler, won't it?
multiqueues don't really depend on cvq. Does this added complexity really justifies adding an artificial limit?
Yes, it does not depends on cvq. Cvq were just used to negotiate the
number of queues a guest wishes to use which is really useful (at least
for now). Since multiqueue can not out-perform for single queue in every
kinds of workloads or benchmark, so we want to let guest driver use
single queue by default even when multiqueue were enabled by management
software and let use to enalbe it through ethtool. So user could not
feel regression when it switch to use a multiqueue capable driver and
backend.
So the only difference is the user experiences.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
