From: Nandini Rangaswamy <nandini.rangaswamy@broadcom.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>,
users@dpdk.org
Subject: Netvsc vs Failsafe Performance
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 14:43:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAkQrK-quv_w+1KG=H3yDsiN9Xki9DigucZCy7q_RwMLmgCYyg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1347 bytes --]
Hi Stephen and Long,
I was going through one of the netvsc patches
https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2018-August/110559.html which mentioned
that netvsc and failsafe give the same performance in VF path whereas for
some exception path tests, about 22% performance gain in seen.
I ran some tests locally with my dpdk app integrated with netvsc PMD and
observed that netvsc does give nearly the same performance as failsafe in
the VF path.
Since the official document does not explicitly cite this, I would like to
confirm if this holds good.
Regards,
Nandini
--
This electronic communication and the information and any files transmitted
with it, or attached to it, are confidential and are intended solely for
the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain
information that is confidential, legally privileged, protected by privacy
laws, or otherwise restricted from disclosure to anyone else. If you are
not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the
e-mail to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
copying, distributing, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of
this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error,
please return the e-mail to the sender, delete it from your computer, and
destroy any printed copy of it.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1567 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2024-09-03 21:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-03 21:43 Nandini Rangaswamy [this message]
2024-09-04 0:03 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-09-04 0:21 ` Nandini Rangaswamy
2024-09-04 22:42 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-09-05 2:30 ` Long Li
2024-09-12 20:47 ` Nandini Rangaswamy
2024-09-12 23:09 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-09-13 17:56 ` Nandini Rangaswamy
2024-09-13 21:27 ` Long Li
2024-09-13 21:29 ` Nandini Rangaswamy
2024-09-16 22:58 ` Nandini Rangaswamy
2024-09-17 21:56 ` Long Li
2024-09-19 16:45 ` Nandini Rangaswamy
2024-09-12 22:02 ` Nandini Rangaswamy
2024-09-12 22:59 ` Stephen Hemminger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAAkQrK-quv_w+1KG=H3yDsiN9Xki9DigucZCy7q_RwMLmgCYyg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=nandini.rangaswamy@broadcom.com \
--cc=longli@microsoft.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=users@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).