Aaron Conole, May 23, 2023 at 15:32: > I think one issue I have with this is that the name is a bit > misleading. Control plane, from OVS perspective, would be like OpenFlow > communications. This is more like a traffic steering mechanism. > > Maybe it would help to call it something like "traffic-based-rps" or > something like that (but not clear what would be best). It is really a > way to steer specific traffic to a distinct rxq. > > WDYT?
Actually, "packet-steering" was one of the first ideas I had for this feature, but I thought it may be confusing. I am weary of reusing the "rps" acronym as it may be confused with a linux specific feature: https://docs.kernel.org/networking/scaling.html#rps-receive-packet-steering The feature introduced in this patch is relying on RTE flow which has nothing to do with Linux. However, I agree that the name should reflect that we are steering traffic into a dedicated rxq. How about these ideas? options:isolated-rxq=lacp,... options:rxq-isolate=lacp,... options:rxq-steering=lacp,... I personally prefer "rxq-isolate". _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
