> -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wang, Zhihong > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 10:55 AM > To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com> > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>; > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo > <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/6] testpmd: handle all rxqs in rss setup > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 5:42 PM > > To: Wang, Zhihong <zhihong.wang at intel.com> > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>; > > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo > > <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] testpmd: handle all rxqs in rss setup > > > > 2016-05-05 18:46, Zhihong Wang: > > > This patch removes constraints in rxq handling when multiqueue is enabled > > > to handle all the rxqs. > > > > > > Current testpmd forces a dedicated core for each rxq, some rxqs may be > > > ignored when core number is less than rxq number, and that causes > confusion > > > and inconvenience. > > > > I have the feeling that "constraints", "confusion" and "inconvenience" > > should be more explained. > > Please give some examples with not enough and too much cores. Thanks > > Sure, will add detailed description in v2 ;)
V2 has been sent. We see increasing examples looking for help on this "confusion", one recent example: http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-June/072110.html
