On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.ker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> +static void virtnet_poll_cleantx(struct receive_queue *rq)
>>> +{
>>> + struct virtnet_info *vi = rq->vq->vdev->priv;
>>> + unsigned int index = vq2rxq(rq->vq);
>>> + struct send_queue *sq = &vi->sq[index];
>>> + struct netdev_queue *txq = netdev_get_tx_queue(vi->dev, index);
>>> +
>>> + __netif_tx_lock(txq, smp_processor_id());
>>> + free_old_xmit_skbs(sq, sq->napi.weight);
>>> + __netif_tx_unlock(txq);
>>
>>
>> Should we check tx napi weight here? Or this was treated as an independent
>> optimization?
>
> Good point. This was not intended to run in no-napi mode as is.
> With interrupts disabled most of the time in that mode, I don't
> expect it to be worthwhile using in that case. I'll add the check
> for sq->napi.weight != 0.
I'm wrong here. Rx interrupts are not disabled, of course. It is
probably worth benchmarking, then.
