From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24021C10F0E for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 21:29:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D37B42054F for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 21:29:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="faQm77cQ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388358AbfDRV3B (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Apr 2019 17:29:01 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com ([209.85.166.68]:34392 "EHLO mail-io1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728264AbfDRV3B (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Apr 2019 17:29:01 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id n11so3074234ioh.1 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:29:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=NaJt45Vmm1wN8r17RnT/xCD2tpAIcQL+lRnsZagf5iQ=; b=faQm77cQZMvTmsVOH+VS2k7BqdPg5gR46PGvlHUgjZ1z1ii/7OU4sq1ZpmoclY02HP jRRhUa4ERiuiVu0huPShIm5Jjg5SX3bS/MkMmkVD/8v8JZH/AD10DGM8HR9tQ1lkrBF2 iBvpmW/J79M86tCgtyKPbQ/cjCiRYIHBb/qhk6kmc73ZajodNbCk1EojGZH8Ksr/25tT Q8ghQ7bxzxIa7jMPVvSctqr2qlah0rE+3Z5J+Zp6fkd2SaGsWXlHlOA2/XztWbF7BRwk +NEgmluSa969PFcGaUlSpZ+ukWKbOWpJEZrQgyLjqkO4AxYQ/YbWDpO67KCeetwuzFiZ sXiQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=NaJt45Vmm1wN8r17RnT/xCD2tpAIcQL+lRnsZagf5iQ=; b=OA7U5cAvcktuU8GLhVENL66+lRF6vkgcyjv4GM/XicJcfguL5l2hHDDltbdvpUHHuw gX8anoJ05vZPPAACUfTJQpDNkRiJ3qtJKVeAzNSdVI81jQydqd+kT1vjRCn2Z1QxNCHS JvePbnWVuoHo1eiKI5QPQJ7En0gM6HKR0U9Kyg9Qk97UdnZ/N6B3XfWA8dGy4RSbF17k P5Ye+Pzlsvkgxf+sAPdaNyrSL06/OXZnBfKu5nTDoj4Iu5QbLUdlLvm4ucRimJq+QLYn A0jirkrV6QTcs6/TvTUbX5uudBU66bwLyDQaxd2F/eMGLIeY0RNk66eCuSSW919pTKL2 6kKA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUiCWVUazzWfVG4spcHPQlIC/uJM3uYbHbZUcwko+J2acqvKrFG 9K1wpEoopQfpAVnCXfDkW3Qw1V/csfZw0Fi8Gcs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz9cNL5Tp8kPH+Dt+Jb0eqyAyR+Tv+uhhJHmjgaCP2c4GUeaiy0pvG5vF9ZA5YkMzLfSf87IMjZDlk9ysKlm3E= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:680f:: with SMTP id d15mr350478ioc.116.1555622940379; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:29:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190404215632.9881-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <461c66428b411644e78ad5a9a44c47442c9b6edf.camel@intel.com> <87d0ljhw09.fsf@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <87d0ljhw09.fsf@intel.com> From: Alexander Duyck Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:28:49 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v1] igb: Fix limiting the number of queues to number of cpus To: Vinicius Costa Gomes Cc: Jeff Kirsher , intel-wired-lan , Netdev , Bhagath Singh Karunakaran Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 1:57 PM Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > > Jeff Kirsher writes: > > > I will discuss the issue with my fellow developers and hopefully we can > > come up with a kernel interface that all drivers can use to handle this > > issue. > > Did you have the chance to discuss this issue? > > > Cheers, > -- > Vinicius Is there any reason why you couldn't just use the "ethtool -L" command to change the number of queues after creating the interface instead of having to use a module parameter? Just wondering since that would be a way to change the number of queues, and it should support values greater than the number of CPUs if I am not mistaken. Thanks. - Alex From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Duyck Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:28:49 -0700 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v1] igb: Fix limiting the number of queues to number of cpus In-Reply-To: <87d0ljhw09.fsf@intel.com> References: <20190404215632.9881-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <461c66428b411644e78ad5a9a44c47442c9b6edf.camel@intel.com> <87d0ljhw09.fsf@intel.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 1:57 PM Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > > Jeff Kirsher writes: > > > I will discuss the issue with my fellow developers and hopefully we can > > come up with a kernel interface that all drivers can use to handle this > > issue. > > Did you have the chance to discuss this issue? > > > Cheers, > -- > Vinicius Is there any reason why you couldn't just use the "ethtool -L" command to change the number of queues after creating the interface instead of having to use a module parameter? Just wondering since that would be a way to change the number of queues, and it should support values greater than the number of CPUs if I am not mistaken. Thanks. - Alex