[ovs-dev] [PATCH v14 0/5] dpcls func ptrs & optimizations

Stokes, Ian ian.stokes at intel.com
Fri Jul 19 11:00:24 UTC 2019



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:i.maximets at samsung.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2019 11:57 AM
> To: Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes at intel.com>; Van Haaren, Harry
> <harry.van.haaren at intel.com>; dev at openvswitch.org
> Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v14 0/5] dpcls func ptrs & optimizations
> 
> On 19.07.2019 11:27, Ian Stokes wrote:
> > On 7/19/2019 9:08 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> >> On 19.07.2019 9:58, Ian Stokes wrote:
> >>> On 7/18/2019 3:30 PM, Ian Stokes wrote:
> >>>> On 7/18/2019 2:03 PM, Harry van Haaren wrote:
> >>>>> Hey Folks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here a v14 of the DPCLS Function Pointer patchset, as has been
> >>>>> presented at OVS Conf in Nov '18, and discussed on the ML since
> then.
> >>>>> I'm aware of the soft-freeze for 2.12, I feel this patchset has had
> >>>>> enough reviews/versions/testing to be merged in 2.12.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks Ilya for input and suggestions on v13. Only change is that
> >>>>> the implementation of the blocks array memory allocation is now
> >>>>> using DEFINE_PER_THREAD_MALLOCED_DATA() macro, allowing for proper
> >>>>> de-allocation of the allocated memory after a thread exits.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards, -Harry
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Harry for the v14. Just testing it and it seems in good shape
> to me.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Ilya for the suggestions around the per thread allocation for
> scratch as well, this feedback has helped and is resolving multithread
> issues spotted in the earlier series.
> >>>>
> >>>> I feel the patchset is now in a state that it should be considered
> for the 2.12 release.
> >>>>
> >>>> We've had testing from a number of groups over the series (Red Hat,
> Arm, Intel, Samsung) with positive results across the board.
> >>>>
> >>>> It also opens up opportunities for further improving the dpcls in the
> 2.13 release next year.
> >>>>
> >>>> As such I think it's worth an exception to merge before Mondays
> feature freeze so that it benefits from the 4 week settling period before
> release.
> >>>>
> >>>> Are there any objections to this?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> Ian
> >>>
> >>> Hi All,,
> >>>
> >>> I haven't heard any objections to this since yesterday. My intentions
> are to merge this today.
> >>
> >> Hi. Sorry, it was only 2.5 hours of my working time since your previous
> mail.
> >> Are you at office 24/7?
> >
> > Really? I thought my last email was yesterday evening, maybe there was a
> delay in it going out on my side, it's OVS release crunch time so  tend to
> lose track of time, I'm pretty sure I slept for a few hours since the last
> mail :)
> >
> >> I'm testing the v14 now and will reply with results in a couple of
> hours.
> >> Is it OK for you?
> >>
> >
> > Thanks for testing on the latest revsion Ilya, much appreciated. If you
> come across anything untowards today let us know :).
> 
> I finished testing v14. No issues observed. Slight performance difference
> with a previous versions, but nothing significant. So, it's OK for me.

Thanks Ilya, can I add your ack for the series with the amendment on patch 5 you flagged?

Regards
Ian



More information about the dev mailing list