; dev@dpdk.org; Luiz
> > Capitulino ; Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
> >
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] testpmd: add nanosleep in main loop
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 10:14:23AM +, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
y, November 10, 2017 9:12 AM
> > > To: Marcelo Tosatti
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Luiz Capitulino ; Daniel
> > > Bristot de Oliveira
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] testpmd: add nanosleep in main loop
> > >
> > > Hi Marcelo,
> > >
>
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 01:59:21AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 08:51:02AM -0500, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 11:14:51 +
> > Bruce Richardson wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:42:56AM +0100, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
> > > wrote:
> > >
v@dpdk.org; Luiz Capitulino ; Daniel Bristot
> > de Oliveira
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] testpmd: add nanosleep in main loop
> >
> > Hi Marcelo,
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 04:02:10AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > >
> > >
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 10:12:19AM +0100, Adrien Mazarguil wrote:
> Hi Marcelo,
Hello Adrien,
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 04:02:10AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >
> > This patch allows a configurable pair of values to be set, which
> > controls
> > the frequency and length of a nanosleep call
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:14:51AM +, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:42:56AM +0100, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/10/2017 11:14 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > Agree with Adrian here - the patch doesn't fix the problem in any case,
> >
> > I w
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 08:51:02AM -0500, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 11:14:51 +
> Bruce Richardson wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:42:56AM +0100, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/10/2017 11:14 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > > Agree
On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 11:14:51 +
Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:42:56AM +0100, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/10/2017 11:14 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > Agree with Adrian here - the patch doesn't fix the problem in any case,
> >
> > I wo
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:42:56AM +0100, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
>
>
> On 11/10/2017 11:14 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > Agree with Adrian here - the patch doesn't fix the problem in any case,
>
> I would agree with you if it were possible to assume one can fully
> isolate a CPU
On 11/10/2017 11:14 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> Agree with Adrian here - the patch doesn't fix the problem in any case,
I would agree with you if it were possible to assume one can fully
isolate a CPU on Linux... but it is not...
This:
https://lwn.net/Articles/659490/
is still an open iss
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Adrien Mazarguil
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 9:12 AM
> To: Marcelo Tosatti
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Luiz Capitulino ; Daniel Bristot de
> Oliveira
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test
On 11/10/2017 10:12 AM, Adrien Mazarguil wrote:
> Since testpmd is a development tool not supposed to run in a production
> environment, is there really a need for it to be patched to work around a
> (temporary) Linux kernel bug?
>From the kernel side... not even...
> If so, why is I/O the only f
Hi Marcelo,
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 04:02:10AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
> This patch allows a configurable pair of values to be set, which
> controls
> the frequency and length of a nanosleep call performed at test-pmd's
> iofwd main loop.
>
> The problem is the following: it is necessary
This patch allows a configurable pair of values to be set, which
controls
the frequency and length of a nanosleep call performed at test-pmd's
iofwd main loop.
The problem is the following: it is necessary to execute code
on isolated CPUs which is not part of the packet forwarding load.
For exam
14 matches
Mail list logo
