From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C61D156652 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 01:45:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718588711; cv=none; b=qF/xwj/u2kVzT0Gge7nJVtk6Lbf83Pp96rbnw7USfZEJXyFPihCH98JAUv2HraIWNSdxsNrXDE1pcyLhfBhXWLXoTVBPFWJaQ4QXyqcdo5BhLD/pxzU4T03GJ7OhpNJwYPDRU390OUXxIBdzqUM8yRCWwHrkx7waMI2Dn6U2rWE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718588711; c=relaxed/simple; bh=t5MD1ex9VlAS8c468F/2oWD+5J03aRRoVhgBc7qIz0k=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=bQR9tEl2bvd5TAYSLgU8x7rfLHEVzO6VDNkoNZfGRTiCxUIqqP7nrf/yRjcsM7r3vqZ37U1vfljQrGJr1Z/1z8vC+G4B7ggcxmWAo5j+/N3gHL9CUxxOWkLCTqbHBOVu+DW1nI3OT+1xtKwNHXvpnX2VFs7lN2TJMPwxc88MdrE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=GuX4yWAK; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="GuX4yWAK" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1718588709; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=varLkYvQXXiVYrsly37DyVexBnZsFAUL1jZV89pLMSc=; b=GuX4yWAKQG6FCAFfZdQf8J8buiG4ob9K9fnaQmygUF+HMErud4FgBRrxZKabZJfDTRoMRL ywDROFVrtqnml5mSaukyYP+DVOAxr+Ys2Jm1ZOU2NOfx5Cf2GMCNpAJRK5t8vR3diVJvAx GJdTjYmHHmROg8NxIO3MLtoYhYxwFaI= Received: from mail-pj1-f70.google.com (mail-pj1-f70.google.com [209.85.216.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-519-hMA29X0OPue4_BqMxvcuFA-1; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 21:45:07 -0400 X-MC-Unique: hMA29X0OPue4_BqMxvcuFA-1 Received: by mail-pj1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2c51c2f1d78so890167a91.1 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 18:45:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1718588707; x=1719193507; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=varLkYvQXXiVYrsly37DyVexBnZsFAUL1jZV89pLMSc=; b=AyB3x2jQ04lUZQ4C8z1f4UX/1TOKKA9ECwl/5JLn7DO8Q/7/lWWIwHqYlOg4eNAAZe e+4d9zRlJaBgDsA4lcmpjPIuPQDv9bu/wm6Z7tBRmwUmErBekd/zgWgfMcrf21eAfcH4 dyE0xylHJd97oINCOMjOdNLFRogOpGSyX2TEUPXZ+y1Mu1IQ8Iv0r40vE/aSkZUGO5l7 Y9ifcS6PgKWfSwdpT/AMYwNreDeovyk88ZwKPYrK1zuEQ/HPKhM+UrOIyWc9OtronYoH tXiMOhm/D4HHrLRRqE4i/6TZjbW9HRZ+8xvqZhgw3leEixe3M1lxarHeEAJCNM4Mc95P A4Cw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVLv5oQjmSA2PL/UWBR1w5b6bE8YKsCw/xhITegUU2lcrpp8U6/YwXc0oRYEaxrfV6eVDdKn6XSCt5+hKCuKrbmk1kYygp/ X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw6SJalGeIM6EA8bve2kV5FF082RDePRJtopwbM+b8wsXu/Q/+L 9xfSIN27zE9qtrrDWE3441mPKvIqms8u2bsvd4Jo107NRlVS7gfG6HWwt/bY7ARRsL5StfTAPu5 lUKwa4U3Qh8x12Mp0lYksVSu+MtIDfjnZk3vKZIE5mQE5C7nVc/DPuaPziIgzIsDivNVE1EI2QP i50dQLpEWIaMlBj4PsYrJ2cqCbPgOn X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1109:b0:2c3:2557:3de8 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2c4dba4cc8bmr6965577a91.33.1718588706645; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 18:45:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE0AkWfMq72NwUEMIwBQBHsf866KKlMTTJe+fIwJHWEiL0M9NimZLgYzfnZ5J7nZR659gGCPKCffH8bhH406rg= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1109:b0:2c3:2557:3de8 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2c4dba4cc8bmr6965570a91.33.1718588706277; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 18:45:06 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240606020248-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20240607062231-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20240610101346-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20240610101346-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> From: Jason Wang Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 09:44:55 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch net-next] virtio_net: add support for Byte Queue Limits To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Jiri Pirko , Jason Xing , Heng Qi , davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, hawk@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 10:19=E2=80=AFPM Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 01:30:34PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > > Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 12:23:37PM CEST, mst@redhat.com wrote: > > >On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 11:57:37AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > > >> >True. Personally, I would like to just drop orphan mode. But I'm no= t > > >> >sure others are happy with this. > > >> > > >> How about to do it other way around. I will take a stab at sending p= atch > > >> removing it. If anyone is against and has solid data to prove orphan > > >> mode is needed, let them provide those. > > > > > >Break it with no warning and see if anyone complains? > > > > This is now what I suggested at all. > > > > >No, this is not how we handle userspace compatibility, normally. > > > > Sure. > > > > Again: > > > > I would send orphan removal patch containing: > > 1) no module options removal. Warn if someone sets it up > > 2) module option to disable napi is ignored > > 3) orphan mode is removed from code > > > > There is no breakage. Only, hypotetically performance downgrade in some > > hypotetical usecase nobody knows of. > > Performance is why people use virtio. It's as much a breakage as any > other bug. The main difference is, with other types of breakage, they > are typically binary and we can not tolerate them at all. A tiny, > negligeable performance regression might be tolarable if it brings > other benefits. I very much doubt avoiding interrupts is > negligeable though. And making code simpler isn't a big benefit, > users do not care. It's not just making code simpler. As discussed in the past, it also fixes real bugs. > > > My point was, if someone presents > > solid data to prove orphan is needed during the patch review, let's tos= s > > out the patch. > > > > Makes sense? > > It's not hypothetical - if anything, it's hypothetical that performance > does not regress. And we just got a report from users that see a > regression without. So, not really. Probably, but do we need to define a bar here? Looking at git history, we didn't ask a full benchmark for a lot of commits that may touch performance. Thanks > > > > > > > > >-- > > >MST > > > >