Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:i.maxim...@samsung.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 8:52 PM
> To: Kevin Traynor ; Stokes, Ian ;
> Jan Scheurich ; Venkatesan Pradeep
>
On 11.04.2018 20:55, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> On 04/10/2018 11:12 AM, Stokes, Ian wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:i.maxim...@samsung.com]
> Sent: Monday, 29 January, 2018 09:35
> To: Jan Scheurich ; Venkatesan Pradeep
On 04/10/2018 11:12 AM, Stokes, Ian wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:i.maxim...@samsung.com]
Sent: Monday, 29 January, 2018 09:35
To: Jan Scheurich ; Venkatesan Pradeep
; Stokes, Ian
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:i.maxim...@samsung.com]
> >> Sent: Monday, 29 January, 2018 09:35
> >> To: Jan Scheurich ; Venkatesan Pradeep
> >> ; Stokes, Ian
> >> ;
> -Original Message-
> From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:i.maxim...@samsung.com]
> Sent: Monday, 29 January, 2018 09:35
> To: Jan Scheurich ; Venkatesan Pradeep
> ; Stokes, Ian
> ; d...@openvswitch.org
> Cc:
On 01/26/2018 05:21 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 26.01.2018 18:47, Kevin Traynor wrote:
>> hOn 01/26/2018 03:16 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>> On 26.01.2018 15:00, Stokes, Ian wrote:
Hi All,
Recently an issue was raised regarding the move from a single shared
mempool model that
On 01/26/2018 05:27 PM, Stokes, Ian wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Kevin Traynor [mailto:ktray...@redhat.com]
>> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 3:48 PM
>> To: Ilya Maximets ; Stokes, Ian
>> ; ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org
>> Cc: Flavio
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Traynor [mailto:ktray...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 8:03 AM
> To: Stokes, Ian ; Ilya Maximets
> ; ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org
> Cc: Flavio Leitner ; Loftus, Ciara
>
Hi,
I'd like to take one step back and look at how much many mbufs we actually need.
Today mbufs are consumed in the following places:
a) Rx queues of *physical* dpdk ports: dev->requested_n_rxq *
dev->requested_rxq_size
Note 1: These mbufs are hogged up at all times.
Note 2: There
>> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 11:04 PM
>> To: Jan Scheurich <jan.scheur...@ericsson.com>; Stokes, Ian
>> <ian.sto...@intel.com>; ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org
>> Cc: Ilya Maximets (i.maxim...@samsung.com) <i.maxim...@samsung.com>;
>> Flav
On 29.01.2018 11:19, Jan Scheurich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to take one step back and look at how much many mbufs we actually
> need.
>
> Today mbufs are consumed in the following places:
>
> 1. Rx queues of **physical** dpdk ports: dev->requested_n_rxq *
> dev->requested_rxq_size
>
On 29.01.2018 11:50, Jan Scheurich wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:i.maxim...@samsung.com]
>> Sent: Monday, 29 January, 2018 09:35
>> To: Jan Scheurich ; Venkatesan Pradeep
>> ; Stokes, Ian
>>
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 05:16:02PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 26.01.2018 15:00, Stokes, Ian wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Recently an issue was raised regarding the move from a single shared
> > mempool model that was in place up to OVS 2.8, to a mempool per port model
> > introduced in 2.9.
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Traynor [mailto:ktray...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 3:48 PM
> To: Ilya Maximets ; Stokes, Ian
> ; ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org
> Cc: Flavio Leitner ; Loftus, Ciara
>
hOn 01/26/2018 03:16 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 26.01.2018 15:00, Stokes, Ian wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Recently an issue was raised regarding the move from a single shared mempool
>> model that was in place up to OVS 2.8, to a mempool per port model
>> introduced in 2.9.
>>
>>
On 26.01.2018 15:00, Stokes, Ian wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Recently an issue was raised regarding the move from a single shared mempool
> model that was in place up to OVS 2.8, to a mempool per port model introduced
> in 2.9.
>
>
16 matches
Mail list logo