Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "_wake_up".
Did you mean:
wake_up
2016 Apr 27
2
[PATCH] vhost_net: stop polling socket during rx processing
...> improvement on pps:
>
> before: ~1370000 pkt/s
> after: ~1500000 pkt/s
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com>
Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
There is one other possible enhancement: we actually have the wait queue
lock taken in _wake_up, but we give it up only to take it again in the
handler.
It would be nicer to just remove the entry when we wake
the vhost thread. Re-add it if required.
I think that something like the below would give you the necessary API.
Pls feel free to use it if you are going to implement a patch on top
doi...
2016 Apr 27
2
[PATCH] vhost_net: stop polling socket during rx processing
...> improvement on pps:
>
> before: ~1370000 pkt/s
> after: ~1500000 pkt/s
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com>
Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
There is one other possible enhancement: we actually have the wait queue
lock taken in _wake_up, but we give it up only to take it again in the
handler.
It would be nicer to just remove the entry when we wake
the vhost thread. Re-add it if required.
I think that something like the below would give you the necessary API.
Pls feel free to use it if you are going to implement a patch on top
doi...
2016 Apr 28
0
[PATCH] vhost_net: stop polling socket during rx processing
...gt;> before: ~1370000 pkt/s
>> after: ~1500000 pkt/s
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com>
> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
>
> There is one other possible enhancement: we actually have the wait queue
> lock taken in _wake_up, but we give it up only to take it again in the
> handler.
>
> It would be nicer to just remove the entry when we wake
> the vhost thread. Re-add it if required.
> I think that something like the below would give you the necessary API.
> Pls feel free to use it if you are going to...