> Please add short description something like, > > When the driver prefers to use per virtqueue notifications coalescing, and if > queue group (transmit or receive) level notification coalescing is enabled, > driver SHOULD first disable device level notification coalescing. > Or it should be, >
I disagree here. IMO "queue group level notification coalescing" is not something to enable or disable, but a shortcut to set all TX/RX queues at once. Why should the spec force a driver to "disable device level notification coalescing" (I assume you mean send a VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_NOTF_COAL_[T/R]X_SET command with zeros)? What if the driver sends a VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_NOTF_COAL_[T/R]X_SET command, and then a single queue traffic increases? why should it zero the parameters to all other queues? I think that this should be discussed in the driver implementation stage, not in the spec. > Virtqueue level notifications coalescing, and device level notifications can > be enabled together. > When both of them are enabled, per virtqueue notifications coalescing take > priority over queue group level. How do you enable Virtqueue level notifications coalescing? Why are they different entities? I don't think that we should have priorities, but the last command should be the one that dictates the coalescing parameters. For example, let's look at vq0 (RX): Device receives VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_NOTF_COAL_RX_SET, vq0 should change the parameters accordingly (all RX vqs should do the same). Then device receives VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_NOTF_COAL_VQ_SET with vqn = 0, vq0 changes the parameters accordingly (all RX vqs are still using the "old" parameters) Then device receives VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_NOTF_COAL_RX_SET, vq0 changes the parameters accordingly (all RX vqs should do the same). --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
