svn commit: r301197 - head/sys/dev/xen/netfront

[Hans Petter Selasky]

On 06/02/16 14:54, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 01:19:56PM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>> On 06/02/16 13:14, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> +		callout_reset(&rxq->rx_refill, hz/10, xn_alloc_rx_buffers_callout,
>>> +		    rxq);
>>
>> Maybe use callout_reset_curcpu() to take advantage of callout's SMP
>> capabilities ?
>
> Yes, that's fine. But what's the benefit of it? I don't really care whether
> the callout is run on the current CPU or not. Is callout_reset_curcpu
> cheaper than callout_reset?
>

Hi,

It is maybe not cheaper, but it will distribute the load of the 
xn_alloc_rx_buffers_callout() callback, to the current CPU calling 
callout_reset_curcpu(). Else xn_alloc_rx_buffers_callout() will always 
be called from callback thread zero.

--HPS