|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net-next] xen-netfront: always set num queues if possible
On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 11:59 +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 14/09/15 22:28, Charles (Chas) Williams wrote:
> > The xen store preserves this information across module invocations.
> > If you insmod netfront with two queues and later insmod again with one
> > queue, the backend will still believe you asked for two queues.
>
> Can you rewrite the commit message to be clearer?
>
> "If netfront connects with 2 (or more) queues and then reconnects with
> only 1 queue it fails to delete or rewrite the multi-queue-num-queues
> key and netback will try to use the wrong number of queues.
>
> Always write the num-queues field if the backend has multi-queue support."
Yes I can do that.
>
> > --- a/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> > @@ -1819,11 +1819,7 @@ again:
> > goto destroy_ring;
> > }
> >
> > - if (num_queues == 1) {
> > - err = write_queue_xenstore_keys(&info->queues[0], &xbt, 0); /*
> > flat */
> > - if (err)
> > - goto abort_transaction_no_dev_fatal;
> > - } else {
> > + if (xenbus_exists(xbt, dev->nodename, "multi-queue-num-queues")) {
> > /* Write the number of queues */
> > err = xenbus_printf(xbt, dev->nodename,
> > "multi-queue-num-queues",
> > "%u", num_queues);
>
> Isn't this broken? It looks like it won't write the
> multi-queue-num-queues key the first time around.
>
> It think this should be conditional on multi-queue-max-queues existing
> (which is written by the backend if multi-queue is supported).
You are right. I am testing against the wrong key here. I should have
tested for multi-queue-max-queues.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |