On 12/28/2013 05:41 AM, Michael Dalton wrote: > I'm working on a followup patchset to address current feedback. I think > it will be cleaner to do a debugfs implementation for per-receive queue > packet buffer size exporting, so I'm trying that out. > > On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Jason Wang <[email protected]> wrote: >> We can make this more accurate by using extra data structure to track >> the real buf size and using it as token. > I agree -- we can do precise buffer total len tracking. Something like > struct mergeable_packet_buffer_ctx { > void *buf; > unsigned int total_len; > }; > > Each receive queue could have a pointer to an array of N buffer contexts, > where N is queue size (kzalloc'd in init_vqs or similar). That would > allow us to allocate all of our buffer context data at startup. > > Would this be preferred to the current approach or is there another > approach you would prefer? All other things being equal, having precise > length tracking is advantageous, so I'm inclined to try this out and > see how it goes.
I think this is better since it was accurate and easier to be implemented and understand. Thanks > > I think this is a big design point - for example, if we have an extra > buffer context structure, then per-receive queue frag allocators are not > required for auto-tuning and we can reduce the number of patches in > this patchset. > > I'm happy to implement either way. Thanks! > > Best, > > Mike _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
