Yes, I tested both variants. The rxq_recv() variant is a bit faster.
The main reason I settled on the rxq_recv() option is that it is much simpler
and has a potential use case also in Billy's upcoming patch for rxq priority
polling, where it might add value to know the remaining packets in the q
Consider it done :-)
I'll wait with a v9 until I have all review comments implemented.
Thanks, Jan
> -Original Message-
> From: O Mahony, Billy [mailto:billy.o.mah...@intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 15 February, 2018 15:41
> To: Jan Scheurich ; d...@openvswitch.org
> Cc: ktray...@redhat.com;
Hello Jan.
I have a question: Have you tested the performance difference between
netdev_rxq_length() and rxq_recv() parameter approaches to get the rx queue
size?
Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
On 13.02.2018 19:03, Jan Scheurich wrote:
> Gentle reminder to review this series which unfortunately m
Hi Jan,
Everyone is probably reviewed-out :)
I'm happy to ack once the +='s are fixed.
Regards,
Billy.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jan Scheurich [mailto:jan.scheur...@ericsson.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 4:04 PM
> To: d...@openvswitch.org
> Cc: ktray...@redhat.com; Stoke
Gentle reminder to review this series which unfortunately missed the 2.9
deadline.
I checked and the patches still apply on today's master.
So far I have received one comment from Billy
https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2018-January/343808.html
Thanks, Jan
> -Original Message--
