On 27 February 2014 15:49, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Michael: Luke has asked to increase the virtio-net virtqueue size.
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Stefan
>
> Heh you want to increase the bufferbloat?
>
I'm sensitive to this. (I have actually built a commercial anti-bufferbloat
network device for
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 03:17:44PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 05:14:04PM +0100, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> > On 24 February 2014 16:20, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >
> > > Do you want the 1:1 mapping to achieve best performance or just to
> > > simplify the coding?
> > >
> >
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 05:14:04PM +0100, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> On 24 February 2014 16:20, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>
> > Do you want the 1:1 mapping to achieve best performance or just to
> > simplify the coding?
> >
>
> We want to keep the real-time constraints on the data plane comfortable.
>
>
On 24 February 2014 16:20, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 02:43:14PM +0100, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> > In Snabb Switch we are creating a 1:1 mapping between Virtio-net
> > descriptors and VMDq hardware receive descriptors. The VMDq queues
> support
> > 32768 buffers and I'd like to
On 24 February 2014 16:20, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> Do you want the 1:1 mapping to achieve best performance or just to
> simplify the coding?
>
We want to keep the real-time constraints on the data plane comfortable.
The question I ask myself is: How long can I buffer packets during
processing
