On 04/01/2016 09:04 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 12:49 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 04/01/2016 10:55 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 10:13 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>
>>>
The problem is we want to support busy polling for tun. This needs
napi_id t
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 06:04:19AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 12:49 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> > On 04/01/2016 10:55 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 10:13 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> The problem is we want to support busy polling for
On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 12:49 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 04/01/2016 10:55 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 10:13 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> >
> >> The problem is we want to support busy polling for tun. This needs
> >> napi_id to be passed to tun socket by sk_mark_napi_id()
On 04/01/2016 10:55 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 10:13 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
>> The problem is we want to support busy polling for tun. This needs
>> napi_id to be passed to tun socket by sk_mark_napi_id() during
>> tun_net_xmit(). But before reaching this, XPS will set
On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 10:13 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> The problem is we want to support busy polling for tun. This needs
> napi_id to be passed to tun socket by sk_mark_napi_id() during
> tun_net_xmit(). But before reaching this, XPS will set sender_cpu will
> make us can't see correct napi_i
On 04/01/2016 04:01 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 03:32:21 -0700
>
>> On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 13:50 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> We use a union for napi_id and send_cpu, this is ok for most of the
>>> cases except when we want to support busy polling for tun
On 03/31/2016 06:32 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 13:50 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> We use a union for napi_id and send_cpu, this is ok for most of the
>> cases except when we want to support busy polling for tun which needs
>> napi_id to be stored and passed to socket during tu
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 03:32:21 -0700
> On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 13:50 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> We use a union for napi_id and send_cpu, this is ok for most of the
>> cases except when we want to support busy polling for tun which needs
>> napi_id to be stored and passed to soc
On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 13:50 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> We use a union for napi_id and send_cpu, this is ok for most of the
> cases except when we want to support busy polling for tun which needs
> napi_id to be stored and passed to socket during tun_net_xmit(). In
> this case, napi_id was overridde
We use a union for napi_id and send_cpu, this is ok for most of the
cases except when we want to support busy polling for tun which needs
napi_id to be stored and passed to socket during tun_net_xmit(). In
this case, napi_id was overridden with sender_cpu before tun_net_xmit()
was called if XPS was
10 matches
Mail list logo
