On 5/25/23 11:25, Robin Jarry wrote:
> Hey Ilya,
>
> Ilya Maximets, May 24, 2023 at 17:05:
>> I had a '+' because rss and lacp are two different entities and I looked
>> at it as a mode of operation. i.e. RSS plus special handling for LACP.
>> RSS looks strange in a comma-separated list, IMO.
>
Hey Ilya,
Ilya Maximets, May 24, 2023 at 17:05:
> I had a '+' because rss and lacp are two different entities and I looked
> at it as a mode of operation. i.e. RSS plus special handling for LACP.
> RSS looks strange in a comma-separated list, IMO.
For now, there is only LACP but if other
On 24/05/2023 16:05, Robin Jarry wrote:
Kevin Traynor, May 24, 2023 at 16:54:
The "rss" item should be mandatory anyway. There should be no way to
disable it. I assume that it is what Ilya meant with these "+" symbols.
That would leave us with these examples:
# lacp+bfd on separate queue, rss
Kevin Traynor, May 24, 2023 at 16:54:
> > The "rss" item should be mandatory anyway. There should be no way to
> > disable it. I assume that it is what Ilya meant with these "+" symbols.
> > That would leave us with these examples:
> >
> > # lacp+bfd on separate queue, rss on other queues
> >
>
On 5/24/23 16:54, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> On 24/05/2023 15:32, Robin Jarry wrote:
>> Kevin Traynor, May 24, 2023 at 16:06:
>>> Hmm, not sure on this one. I have a feeling that having a 'hash' mode
>>> for tx-steering that only applies to vhost devices, and 'hash' mode
>>> for rx-steering that only
Hey Kevin,
Kevin Traynor, May 24, 2023 at 16:13:
> Hi Robin,
>
> I tested combinations of enabling/disabling cp-proto and enabling
> hwol. It is working as expected and hwol feature always has a clear
> priority, regardless of the order they are enabled in.
>
> I didn't test lacp traffic, but I
On 24/05/2023 15:32, Robin Jarry wrote:
Kevin Traynor, May 24, 2023 at 16:06:
Hmm, not sure on this one. I have a feeling that having a 'hash' mode
for tx-steering that only applies to vhost devices, and 'hash' mode
for rx-steering that only applies to NICs means people will miss the
subtlety
Kevin Traynor, May 24, 2023 at 16:06:
> Hmm, not sure on this one. I have a feeling that having a 'hash' mode
> for tx-steering that only applies to vhost devices, and 'hash' mode
> for rx-steering that only applies to NICs means people will miss the
> subtlety and try to enable the wrong hash
On 17/04/2023 13:37, Robin Jarry wrote:
Some control protocols are used to maintain link status between
forwarding engines (e.g. LACP). When the system is not sized properly,
the PMD threads may not be able to process all incoming traffic from the
configured Rx queues. When a signaling packet of
On 24/05/2023 11:41, Ilya Maximets wrote:
On 5/24/23 09:18, Robin Jarry wrote:
Ilya Maximets, May 23, 2023 at 22:04:
'rxq-isolate' will be confused with 'other_config:pmd-rxq-isolate'.
Same likely goes for the 'isolated-rxq'.
'rxq-steernig' may be confused with 'other_config:tx-steering'.
But
On 5/24/23 09:18, Robin Jarry wrote:
> Ilya Maximets, May 23, 2023 at 22:04:
>> 'rxq-isolate' will be confused with 'other_config:pmd-rxq-isolate'.
>> Same likely goes for the 'isolated-rxq'.
>>
>> 'rxq-steernig' may be confused with 'other_config:tx-steering'.
>> But this can be argued that it's
Ilya Maximets, May 23, 2023 at 22:04:
> 'rxq-isolate' will be confused with 'other_config:pmd-rxq-isolate'.
> Same likely goes for the 'isolated-rxq'.
>
> 'rxq-steernig' may be confused with 'other_config:tx-steering'.
> But this can be argued that it's essentially similar functionality,
> so
On 5/23/23 16:16, Robin Jarry wrote:
> 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
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
On 23/05/2023 14:32, Aaron Conole wrote:
Robin Jarry writes:
Some control protocols are used to maintain link status between
forwarding engines (e.g. LACP). When the system is not sized properly,
the PMD threads may not be able to process all incoming traffic from the
configured Rx queues.
Robin Jarry writes:
> Some control protocols are used to maintain link status between
> forwarding engines (e.g. LACP). When the system is not sized properly,
> the PMD threads may not be able to process all incoming traffic from the
> configured Rx queues. When a signaling packet of such
Some control protocols are used to maintain link status between
forwarding engines (e.g. LACP). When the system is not sized properly,
the PMD threads may not be able to process all incoming traffic from the
configured Rx queues. When a signaling packet of such protocols is
dropped, it can cause
17 matches
Mail list logo
