On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 12:31 PM Kevin Traynor <[email protected]> wrote: > > In the case where there is a NUMA node that has a zero variance > improvement, the log will report it's variance improvement as value for > a previous NUMA node with a non-zero variance improvement. > > For example in an artificial case: > |dpif_netdev|DBG|Numa node 1. Current variance 1000 Estimated variance 0. > Variance improvement 100%. > ^^^ correct value > > |dpif_netdev|DBG|Numa node 0. Current variance 0 Estimated variance 0. > Variance improvement 100%. > ^^^ incorrect value for Numa 0, value from Numa 1 > > This is caused by not resetting the improvement between loops. > > This is a debug log reporting issue only, non-zero variance improvement > will still trigger rebalance where appropriate. > > Move improvement and other variables into the loop code block to fix > logs. > > Fixes: 58fed7e8d8e8 ("dpif-netdev: Make PMD auto load balance use common rxq > scheduling.") > Reported-at: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/FDP-1145 > Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor <[email protected]> > --- > lib/dpif-netdev.c | 8 +++++--- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/dpif-netdev.c b/lib/dpif-netdev.c > index b572fab23..d51d4d540 100644 > --- a/lib/dpif-netdev.c > +++ b/lib/dpif-netdev.c > @@ -6519,8 +6519,6 @@ pmd_rebalance_dry_run(struct dp_netdev *dp) > struct sched_numa_list numa_list_cur; > struct sched_numa_list numa_list_est; > + struct sched_numa *numa_cur;
I would move this variable under the if() block later. But other than that, this change looks good to me. Reviewed-by: David Marchand <[email protected]> -- David Marchand _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
