On 2018/11/5 ??11:28, Vitaly Mayatskih wrote:> On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 9:53 PM Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com>
wrote:
>
>> I wonder whether or not it's better to allow the device to specific
the
>> worker here instead of forcing a per vq worker model. Then we can keep
>> the behavior of exist implementation and do optimization on top?
> I was thinking about that too, but for the sake of simplicity it
> sounds valid that if the user wanted 8 parallel queues for the disk,
> they better be parallel, i.e. worker per queue. The rest of disks that
> don't need high-performance, can have 1 queue specified.
>
If you allow device to specify the worker itself, you can do any kinds
of mapping bettween work and worker kthread I think. The advantage of
doing this is that you can keep the vhost-net untouched. This makes
things a little bit easier and proving two kthreads is better than one
for -net workload is probably not as easy as it looks. We may get boost
in some cases but degradation for the rest.
Thanks
