Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 09/10/2012 02:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> A final addition: what you suggest above would be >> "TX follows RX", right? BTW, yes. But it's a weird way to express what the nic is doing. >> It is in anticipation of something like that, that I made >> steering programming so generic. >> I think TX follows RX is more immediately useful for reasons above >> but we can add both to spec and let drivers and devices >> decide what they want to support. You mean "RX follows TX"? ie. accelerated RFS. I agree. Perhaps Tom can explain how we avoid out-of-order receive for the accelerated RFS case? It's not clear to me, but we need to be able to do that for virtio-net if it implements accelerated RFS. > AFAIK, ixgbe does "rx follows tx". The only differences between ixgbe > and virtio-net is that ixgbe driver programs the flow director during > packet transmission but we suggest to do it silently in the device for > simplicity. Implying the receive queue by xmit will be slightly laggy. Don't know if that's a problem. Cheers, Rusty. -- 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
