[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] e1000: Various fixes and registers' impleme
|
From: |
Jason Wang |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] e1000: Various fixes and registers' implementation |
|
Date: |
Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:22:17 +0800 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 |
On 10/21/2015 09:32 PM, Leonid Bloch wrote:
> Hi Jason, thanks again for reviewing,
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Jason Wang <address@hidden
> <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 10/18/2015 03:53 PM, Leonid Bloch wrote:
> >> This series fixes several issues with incorrect packet/octet
> counting in
> >> e1000's Statistic registers, fixes a bug in the packet address
> filtering
> >> procedure, and implements many MAC registers that were absent before.
> >> Additionally, some cosmetic changes are made.
> >>
> >> Leonid Bloch (6):
> >> e1000: Cosmetic and alignment fixes
> >> e1000: Trivial implementation of various MAC registers
> >> e1000: Fixing the received/transmitted packets' counters
> >> e1000: Fixing the received/transmitted octets' counters
> >> e1000: Fixing the packet address filtering procedure
> >> e1000: Implementing various counters
> >>
> >> hw/net/e1000.c | 313
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> >> hw/net/e1000_regs.h | 8 +-
> >> 2 files changed, 236 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)
> >>
> >
> > Looks good to me overall, just few comments in individual patches.
> >
> > A question here, is there any real user/OSes that tries to use those
> > registers? If not, maintain them sees a burden and it's a little bit
> > hard the test them unless unit-test were implemented for those
> > registers. And I'd like to know the test status of this series. At least
> > both windows and linux guest need to be tested.
> >
> > Thanks
>
> While we did not encounter any actual drivers that malfunction because
> of the lack of these registers, implementing them makes the device
> closer to Intel's specs, and reduces the chances that some OSes,
> currently or in the future, may misbehave because of the missing
> registers. The implementation of these additional registers seems as a
> natural continuation of this series, the main purpose of which is to
> fix several bugs in this device.
>
> As for testing, it was performed, obviously, in several different
> scenarios with Linux (Fedora 22) + Windows (2012R2) guests. No
> regressions (and no statistically significant deviations) were found.
> Please find representative results (TCP, 1 stream) for both Linux and
> Windows guests below:
>
> Fedora 22 guest -- receive
> 5
> +-+------------------------------------------------------------------+
> |
> A
> 4.5 +-+ A A A
> B
> 4 +-+ A A
> |
> | A B
> |
> 3.5 +-+
> |
> | A
> |
> G 3 +-+ B
> |
> b 2.5 +-+
> |
> / |
> |
> s 2 +-+
> |
> | A
> |
> 1.5 +-+
> |
> |
> |
> 1 +-+ A
> |
> 0.5 +-+ A
> |
> A + + + + + + + + + +
> +
> 0
> +-+---+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+
> 32B 64B 128B 256B 512B 1KB 2KB 4KB 8KB 16KB
> 32KB 64KB
> +--------Buffer size--------+
> Mean-old -- A Mean-new -- B
>
>
> Fedora 22 guest -- transmit
> 2
> +-+------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | B
> A
> 1.8 +-+ A
> |
> 1.6 +-+
> |
> |
> |
> 1.4 +-+ A
> |
> |
> |
> G 1.2 +-+
> |
> b 1 +-+
> |
> / | A
> |
> s 0.8 +-+
> |
> |
> |
> 0.6 +-+ A
> |
> |
> |
> 0.4 +-+ A
> |
> 0.2 +-+ A
> |
> + + + + A + + + + + +
> +
> 0
> A-+---A------A-----A-----+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+
> 32B 64B 128B 256B 512B 1KB 2KB 4KB 8KB 16KB
> 32KB 64KB
> +--------Buffer size--------+
> Mean-old -- A Mean-new -- B
>
>
> Windows 2012R2 guest -- receive
> 3.5
> +-+------------------------------------------------------------------A
> | A A
> B
> 3 +-+
> |
> | A
> |
> |
> |
> 2.5 +-+
> |
> | A
> |
> G 2 +-+
> |
> b |
> |
> / | A
> |
> s 1.5 +-+
> |
> | B
> |
> 1 +-+ A
> |
> |
> |
> | A
> |
> 0.5 +-+ A
> |
> + A A + + + + + + + +
> +
> 0
> A-+---+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+
> 32B 64B 128B 256B 512B 1KB 2KB 4KB 8KB 16KB
> 32KB 64KB
> +--------Buffer size--------+
> Mean-old -- A Mean-new -- B
>
>
> Windows 2012R2 guest --transmit
> 2.5
> +-+------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | A
> A
> | B
> |
> 2 +-+ A
> |
> |
> |
> | A
> |
> |
> |
> G 1.5 +-+ B
> |
> b | A
> |
> / |
> |
> s 1 +-+
> |
> | B
> |
> | A A
> |
> | A
> |
> 0.5 +-+ A A
> |
> | A
> |
> A + + + + + + + + + +
> +
> 0
> +-+---+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+------+-----+
> 32B 64B 128B 256B 512B 1KB 2KB 4KB 8KB 16KB
> 32KB 64KB
> +--------Buffer size--------+
> Mean-old -- A Mean-new -- B
>
>
> Regards,
> Leonid.
>
Result looks good.
Thanks for the testing.
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/6] e1000: Fixing the received/transmitted octets' counters, (continued)
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/6] e1000: Fixing the packet address filtering procedure, Leonid Bloch, 2015/10/18
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/6] e1000: Implementing various counters, Leonid Bloch, 2015/10/18
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/6] e1000: Fixing the received/transmitted packets' counters, Leonid Bloch, 2015/10/18
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] e1000: Various fixes and registers' implementation, Jason Wang, 2015/10/20