[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net-next] xen-netfront: always set num queues if possible
On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 11:59 +0100, David Vrabel wrote: > On 14/09/15 22:28, Charles (Chas) Williams wrote: > > The xen store preserves this information across module invocations. > > If you insmod netfront with two queues and later insmod again with one > > queue, the backend will still believe you asked for two queues. > > Can you rewrite the commit message to be clearer? > > "If netfront connects with 2 (or more) queues and then reconnects with > only 1 queue it fails to delete or rewrite the multi-queue-num-queues > key and netback will try to use the wrong number of queues. > > Always write the num-queues field if the backend has multi-queue support." Yes I can do that. > > > --- a/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c > > @@ -1819,11 +1819,7 @@ again: > > goto destroy_ring; > > } > > > > - if (num_queues == 1) { > > - err = write_queue_xenstore_keys(&info->queues[0], &xbt, 0); /* > > flat */ > > - if (err) > > - goto abort_transaction_no_dev_fatal; > > - } else { > > + if (xenbus_exists(xbt, dev->nodename, "multi-queue-num-queues")) { > > /* Write the number of queues */ > > err = xenbus_printf(xbt, dev->nodename, > > "multi-queue-num-queues", > > "%u", num_queues); > > Isn't this broken? It looks like it won't write the > multi-queue-num-queues key the first time around. > > It think this should be conditional on multi-queue-max-queues existing > (which is written by the backend if multi-queue is supported). You are right. I am testing against the wrong key here. I should have tested for multi-queue-max-queues. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |