> > >>> + /* Update send cycles for all the rx queues evenly. */ > > >> > > >> Just a query, is it right that this is distributed evenly? > > >> If there are more packets from one rx queue than another will it > > >> make a difference or will the cycles spent sending that batch be > > >> the > > same as a batch of a small or larger size? > > >> > > > > > > Maybe the "evenly" comment is a misleading? The send cycles for each > > > rxq is updated proportionally for how many packets that rxq had in > > > the batch. I think this is about the best that can be done. > > > > > > > Yes, it means what Kevin said. > > I'm not sure about this comment. Should I change it? > > I'm also not sure if we need to describe distribution algorithm in > comments. > > It's quiet obvious for me, but I, as an author, can not be objective. > > > > How about something neutral like: > > /* Distribute the send cycles between the rx queues. */ ? > > How about this: > /* Distribute send cycles evenly among transmitted packets and assign to > their respective rx queues. */ >
I think above looks ok to me, I won't block on this at this stage. Thanks Ian > This approximation is actually not too bad as all packets in the batch > went to the same tx queue. The only error we make is to ignore the size of > the packets (which may still be substantial, though, given that the packet > copying cost for large packets is significant in real-world scenarios with > lots of L3 cache misses and especially across the QPI bus). > > BR, Jan _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
