> > > > Btw, this patch is similar in functionality to the one posted by > > Anurag [0] and there was also some discussion about this approach here [1]. > > > > Thanks for pointing this out. > IMO, setting interface cross-numa would be good for phy port but not good for > vhu. Since vhu can be destroyed and created relatively frequently. > But yes the main idea is the same. >
We do acknowledge the benefit of non-pinned polling of phy rx queues by PMD threads on all NUMA nodes. It gives the auto-load balancer much better options to utilize spare capacity on PMDs on all NUMA nodes. Our patch proposed in https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2021-June/384547.html indeed covers the difference between phy and vhu ports. One has to explicitly enable cross-NUMA-polling for individual interfaces with: ovs-vsctl set interface <Name> other_config:cross-numa-polling=true This would typically only be done by static configuration for the fixed set of physical ports. There is no code in the OpenStack's os-vif handler to apply such configuration for dynamically created vhu ports. I would strongly suggest that cross-num-polling be introduced as a per-interface option as in our patch rather than as a per-datapath option as in your patch. Why not adapt our original patch to the latest OVS code base? We can help you with that. BR, Jan _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
