> > On 11/24/2016 03:20 PM, Ciara Loftus wrote: > > This commit announces support for DPDK 16.11. Compaitibilty with DPDK > > v16.07 is not broken yet thanks to only minor code changes being needed > > for the upgrade. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ciara Loftus <[email protected]> > > --- > > .travis/linux-build.sh | 2 +- > > INSTALL.DPDK-ADVANCED.rst | 4 ++-- > > INSTALL.DPDK.rst | 18 +++++++++--------- > > NEWS | 1 + > > lib/netdev-dpdk.c | 3 ++- > > 5 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > <snip /> > > diff --git a/lib/netdev-dpdk.c b/lib/netdev-dpdk.c > > index de78ddd..7564ad7 100644 > > --- a/lib/netdev-dpdk.c > > +++ b/lib/netdev-dpdk.c > > @@ -2593,7 +2593,8 @@ netdev_dpdk_vhost_class_init(void) > > rte_vhost_driver_callback_register(&virtio_net_device_ops); > > rte_vhost_feature_disable(1ULL << VIRTIO_NET_F_HOST_TSO4 > > | 1ULL << VIRTIO_NET_F_HOST_TSO6 > > - | 1ULL << VIRTIO_NET_F_CSUM); > > + | 1ULL << VIRTIO_NET_F_CSUM > > + | 1ULL << VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC); > > ovs_thread_create("vhost_thread", start_vhost_loop, NULL); > > > > ovsthread_once_done(&once); > > > Any reason you disable indirect descs? > Did you measure performance degradation with it?
I measured a slight decrease ~-6% for the use case I tested. Either way, if it is to be enabled it should be enabled in a separate patch. Thanks, Ciara > > > Thanks, > Maxime _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
