On 12/08/2011 12:10 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
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?
The hash were generated by either host kernel or host nic, so I think
it's unique except for the nic that would provide different hashes for a
flow. I wonder whether there's a such nic.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
