On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 02:46:27PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2016-08-23 15:42, Rich Lane:
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 7:16 AM, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan....@linux.intel.com>
> > wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:27:06AM -0700, Rich Lane wrote:
> > > > I could also add back concurrent enqueue support for mergeable RX, but I
> > > > was hoping to avoid that since the mergeable codepath is already complex
> > > > and wouldn't be used in high performance deployments.
> > >
> > > Another note is that, you might also have noticed, Zhihong made a patch
> > > set [0] to optimize the enqueue code path (mainly on mergeable path). It
> > > basically does a rewrite from scatch, which removes the desc buf
> > > reservation,
> > > meaning it would be harder to do concurrent enqueue support based on that.
> > >
> > > [0]: Aug 19 Zhihong Wang ( 68) ├─>[PATCH v3 0/5] vhost: optimize
> > > enqueue
> >
> > Yes, I'd noticed that these patches would conflict. Once the vhost-cuse
> > removal and
> > Zhihong's patches have merged I'll send a new version.
>
> What is the status of this feature?
Rich left bigswitch for a while, and seems no one is working on that
anymore. I think we could just close it.
--yliu
