> >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2019 11:57 AM > >> To: Stokes, Ian <[email protected]>; Van Haaren, Harry > >> <[email protected]>; [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v14 0/5] dpcls func ptrs & optimizations > >> > >> On 19.07.2019 11:27, Ian Stokes wrote: > >>> On 7/19/2019 9:08 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote: > >>>> On 19.07.2019 9:58, Ian Stokes wrote: > >>>>> On 7/18/2019 3:30 PM, Ian Stokes wrote: > >>>>>> On 7/18/2019 2:03 PM, Harry van Haaren wrote: > >>>>>>> Hey Folks, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Here a v14 of the DPCLS Function Pointer patchset, as has been > >>>>>>> presented at OVS Conf in Nov '18, and discussed on the ML since > >> then. > >>>>>>> I'm aware of the soft-freeze for 2.12, I feel this patchset has > had > >>>>>>> enough reviews/versions/testing to be merged in 2.12. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks Ilya for input and suggestions on v13. Only change is that > >>>>>>> the implementation of the blocks array memory allocation is now > >>>>>>> using DEFINE_PER_THREAD_MALLOCED_DATA() macro, allowing for proper > >>>>>>> de-allocation of the allocated memory after a thread exits. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards, -Harry > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks Harry for the v14. Just testing it and it seems in good > shape > >> to me. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks Ilya for the suggestions around the per thread allocation > for > >> scratch as well, this feedback has helped and is resolving multithread > >> issues spotted in the earlier series. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I feel the patchset is now in a state that it should be considered > >> for the 2.12 release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We've had testing from a number of groups over the series (Red Hat, > >> Arm, Intel, Samsung) with positive results across the board. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It also opens up opportunities for further improving the dpcls in > the > >> 2.13 release next year. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As such I think it's worth an exception to merge before Mondays > >> feature freeze so that it benefits from the 4 week settling period > before > >> release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Are there any objections to this? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>> Ian > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi All,, > >>>>> > >>>>> I haven't heard any objections to this since yesterday. My > intentions > >> are to merge this today. > >>>> > >>>> Hi. Sorry, it was only 2.5 hours of my working time since your > previous > >> mail. > >>>> Are you at office 24/7? > >>> > >>> Really? I thought my last email was yesterday evening, maybe there was > a > >> delay in it going out on my side, it's OVS release crunch time so tend > to > >> lose track of time, I'm pretty sure I slept for a few hours since the > last > >> mail :) > >>> > >>>> I'm testing the v14 now and will reply with results in a couple of > >> hours. > >>>> Is it OK for you? > >>>> > >>> > >>> Thanks for testing on the latest revsion Ilya, much appreciated. If > you > >> come across anything untowards today let us know :). > >> > >> I finished testing v14. No issues observed. Slight performance > difference > >> with a previous versions, but nothing significant. So, it's OK for me. > > > > Thanks Ilya, can I add your ack for the series with the amendment on > patch 5 you flagged? > > OK. Sure.
Cool, thank you very much for the work on this, I'm not being finicky but for such a change I think it's worth having two maintainers on board for the commits. Thanks Ian _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
