On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 at 12:01, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 at 10:17, Gaul, Maximilian <maximilian.gaul@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > [...] > >> > >> Thank you so much Björn! > >> > >> just to wrap things up: > >> > >> - if I want to distribute packet processing from a single RX-Queue to > >> multiple sockets I have to use shared umem because it is not possible > >> to bind multiple af-xdp sockets onto the same RX-Queue > > > > Correct! And you need a tailored XDP program that spreads over the > > shared umem sockets! > > Could we lift this restriction? Not with zero-copy, obviously, but if > there's a copy involved it seems it should be possible to support > several sockets on the same RXQ? That would make it possible to use XDP > as a per-CPU load balancer for a single RXQ, like we can do with cpumap > for packets hitting the stack today? > Yes! It's on the (never ending) TODO list. Never heard that before, right? :-( Cheers, Björn > -Toke >
|