On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 6:20 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Patrick Talbert
> Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 16:23:45 -0400
>
>> Network performance can suffer when a load balancing bond uses slave
>> interfaces which are in different NUMA domains.
>>
>> This compares the NUMA domain of a newly enslaved
From: Patrick Talbert
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 16:23:45 -0400
> Network performance can suffer when a load balancing bond uses slave
> interfaces which are in different NUMA domains.
>
> This compares the NUMA domain of a newly enslaved interface against any
> existing enslaved interfaces and prin
On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 13:54 -0400, Patrick Talbert wrote:
>
> My goal with the patch is not to prevent some one from bonding
> whichever interfaces they want, only to notify them that what they are
> doing is *likely* to be less than ideal from a performance
> perspective. Even if some theoretica
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 04:23:45PM -0400, Patrick Talbert wrote:
>> Network performance can suffer when a load balancing bond uses slave
>> interfaces which are in different NUMA domains.
>>
>> This compares the NUMA domain of a newly enslaved i
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 04:23:45PM -0400, Patrick Talbert wrote:
> Network performance can suffer when a load balancing bond uses slave
> interfaces which are in different NUMA domains.
>
> This compares the NUMA domain of a newly enslaved interface against any
> existing enslaved interfaces and p
Network performance can suffer when a load balancing bond uses slave
interfaces which are in different NUMA domains.
This compares the NUMA domain of a newly enslaved interface against any
existing enslaved interfaces and prints a warning if they do not match.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Talbert
---
