On 23/06/2021 12:21, Pai G, Sunil wrote:
> Hey Kevin ,
>
> Patch looks good to me.
> Builds fine , all test cases here
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/20210316154532.127858-1-ktray...@redhat.com/
> pass as well.
>
> Some minor nits inline :
>
>
>
>> +static bool
>>
On 24/06/2021 15:30, David Marchand wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 11:19 PM Kevin Traynor wrote:
>>
>> PMD auto load balance had its own separate implementation of the
>> rxq scheduling that it used for dry runs. This was done because
>> previously the rxq scheduling was not reusable for a dry
On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 11:19 PM Kevin Traynor wrote:
>
> PMD auto load balance had its own separate implementation of the
> rxq scheduling that it used for dry runs. This was done because
> previously the rxq scheduling was not reusable for a dry run.
>
> Apart from the code duplication (which is
Hey Kevin ,
Patch looks good to me.
Builds fine , all test cases here
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/20210316154532.127858-1-ktray...@redhat.com/
pass as well.
Some minor nits inline :
> +static bool
> +pmd_rebalance_dry_run(struct dp_netdev *dp)
> +
PMD auto load balance had its own separate implementation of the
rxq scheduling that it used for dry runs. This was done because
previously the rxq scheduling was not reusable for a dry run.
Apart from the code duplication (which is a good enough reason
to replace it alone) this meant that if any
