On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:38:00AM -0700, Euan Kemp wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 04:26:08PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > I kept this around unchanged from
> > ab7db91705e95ed1bba1304388936fccfa58c992. That commit had an internal
> > reason not to account for that space: not enough bits
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 04:26:08PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> I kept this around unchanged from
> ab7db91705e95ed1bba1304388936fccfa58c992. That commit had an internal
> reason not to account for that space: not enough bits to do it. No
> longer true so let's account for length exactly.
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 04:26:08PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 03:25:52PM -0700, Euan Kemp wrote:
> > I've also observed this performance regression.
> >
> > The minimal fix for me is removing the two
> > > if (unlikely(len > (unsigned long)ctx))
> > checks added in
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 03:25:52PM -0700, Euan Kemp wrote:
> I've also observed this performance regression.
>
> The minimal fix for me is removing the two
> > if (unlikely(len > (unsigned long)ctx))
> checks added in 680557c.
>
> After digging a little more, the reason that check can fail appear
I've also observed this performance regression.
The minimal fix for me is removing the two
> if (unlikely(len > (unsigned long)ctx))
checks added in 680557c.
After digging a little more, the reason that check can fail appears to
be that add_recvbuf_mergeable sometimes includes a hole at the end,
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:30:54AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 04:14:30PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:38:52PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:09:42PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > > > I'm seeing a perfor
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 04:14:30PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:38:52PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:09:42PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > > I'm seeing a performance regression with virtio_net that looks to have
> > > started in 4.12-rc
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:38:52PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:09:42PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > I'm seeing a performance regression with virtio_net that looks to have
> > started in 4.12-rc1. I only see it in one context though, downloading
> > snap packages
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:09:42PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> I'm seeing a performance regression with virtio_net that looks to have
> started in 4.12-rc1. I only see it in one context though, downloading
> snap packages from the Ubuntu snap store. For example:
>
>
> https://api.snapcraft.io/a
