On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 01:35:52AM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 09:39:11 +0530 > > > Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 11/25/2011 08:51:57 AM: > >> > >> My description is not clear again :( > >> I mean the same vhost thead: > >> > >> vhost thread #0 transmits packets of flow A on processor M > >> ... > >> vhost thread #0 move to another process N and start to transmit packets > >> of flow A > > > > Thanks for clarifying. Yes, binding vhosts to CPU's > > makes the incoming packet go to the same vhost each > > time. BTW, are you doing any binding and/or irqbalance > > when you run your tests? I am not running either at > > this time, but thought both might be useful. > > So are we going with this patch or are we saying that vhost binding > is a requirement? OK we didn't come to a conclusion so I would be inclined to merge this patch as is for 3.2, and revisit later. One question though: do these changes affect userspace in any way? For example, will this commit us to ensure that a single flow gets a unique hash even for strange configurations that transmit the same flow from multiple cpus? -- MST _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
