On 15.01.2018 12:27, Stokes, Ian wrote: >>>>>> + /* 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. >
OK. I've sent v11 with changed comment. > 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
