netmap: traffic distribution

[hiren panchasara]

I think you meant "reply-all" :-)

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 7:53 AM, chintu hetam <rometoroam at gmail.com> wrote:

> As far as i know, flow director is Intel terminology it addresses both RSS
> and RFS. I think FreeBSD implementation is RFS.
>
> Luigi, you touched upon SW de-multiplexer, i would like to know why it's
> necessary.
> let say i have 82599 ixgbe driver (RSS enabled)configured with 5 tuple
> hash. My application reads from netmap queue 0-7(1-8), i know for sure that
> each hash will be filtered to specific hw queue(0-7), is it safe to assume
> netmap will provide packets in same order.
>
> Michio, reason i asked for performance values
> http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1106/1106.0443.pdf
> I would like to test the accuracy of RFS,RSS and others in netmap mode..
>
> Thanks
> Hardik
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 2:59 AM, hiren panchasara <
> hiren.panchasara at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:27 PM, chintu hetam <rometoroam at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hiren,
>>>
>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/scaling.txt must
>>> read to understand nuances of each of this features. None of this
>>> techniques are used for mostly none other than performance reasons.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the link.
>> So, RFS (Receive Flow Steering) is equivalent to "flow director"
>> mentioned in FreeBSD's ixgbe drivers?
>>
>>>
>>> Michio, personally i am interested to know performance results in netmap
>>> mode with RFS patch you just mentioned.
>>>
>> Takuya/Luigi might have some numbers.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Hiren
>>
>> <skip>
>>
>>
>