Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-06-03 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 20:47:25 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > On Tue, 24 May 2016 23:34:14 +0300 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 07:03:20PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 24 May 2016 12:28:09 +0200 > > > Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-06-02 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
On Tue, 24 May 2016 23:34:14 +0300 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 07:03:20PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > > > On Tue, 24 May 2016 12:28:09 +0200 > > Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > > > > I do like perf, but it does not answer my questions about the > > >

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-24 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 07:03:20PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > On Tue, 24 May 2016 12:28:09 +0200 > Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > > I do like perf, but it does not answer my questions about the > > performance of this queue. I will code something up in my own > > framework[2] to

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-24 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
On Tue, 24 May 2016 12:28:09 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > I do like perf, but it does not answer my questions about the > performance of this queue. I will code something up in my own > framework[2] to answer my own performance questions. > > Like what is be minimum overhead (in cycles

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-24 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:28:09PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2016 23:52:47 +0300 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:09:18PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 May 2016 13:43:46 +0300 > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-24 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:28:09PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2016 23:52:47 +0300 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:09:18PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 May 2016 13:43:46 +0300 > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-24 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:28:09PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2016 23:52:47 +0300 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:09:18PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 May 2016 13:43:46 +0300 > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-24 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
On Mon, 23 May 2016 23:52:47 +0300 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:09:18PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > On Mon, 23 May 2016 13:43:46 +0300 > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > > > Add ringtest based unit test for skb array. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mich

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-23 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:09:18PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2016 13:43:46 +0300 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > Add ringtest based unit test for skb array. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin > > --- > > tools/virtio/ringtest/skb_array.c | 167 > > +++

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-23 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
On Mon, 23 May 2016 13:43:46 +0300 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > Add ringtest based unit test for skb array. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin > --- > tools/virtio/ringtest/skb_array.c | 167 > ++ > tools/virtio/ringtest/Makefile| 4 +- Patch didn'

[PATCH v5 2/2] skb_array: ring test

2016-05-23 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
Add ringtest based unit test for skb array. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin --- tools/virtio/ringtest/skb_array.c | 167 ++ tools/virtio/ringtest/Makefile| 4 +- 2 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 tools/virtio/ringtes