From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Herbert Xu Subject: Re: SO_REUSEPORT - can it be done in kernel? Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 19:53:05 +0800 Message-ID: <20110301115305.GA6984@gondor.apana.org.au> References: <20110228141322.GF9763@canuck.infradead.org> <1298910174.2941.585.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20110228163742.GH9763@canuck.infradead.org> <1298912869.2941.687.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20110301101955.GI9763@canuck.infradead.org> <1298975602.3284.13.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20110301110708.GJ9763@canuck.infradead.org> <1298977984.3284.15.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20110301112759.GK9763@canuck.infradead.org> <1298979909.3284.28.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Thomas Graf , David Miller , rick.jones2@hp.com, therbert@google.com, wsommerfeld@google.com, daniel.baluta@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from helcar.apana.org.au ([209.40.204.226]:47511 "EHLO fornost.hengli.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754575Ab1CALx2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2011 06:53:28 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1298979909.3284.28.camel@edumazet-laptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 12:45:09PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > CPU 11 handles all TX completions : Its a potential bottleneck. > > I might ressurect XPS patch ;) Actually this has been my gripe all along with our TX multiqueue support. We should not decide the queue based on the socket, but on the current CPU. We already do the right thing for forwarded packets because there is no socket to latch onto, we just need to fix it for locally generated traffic. The odd packet reordering each time your scheduler decides to migrate the process isn't a big deal IMHO. If your scheduler is constantly moving things you've got bigger problems to worry about. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt