MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230311163614.92296-1-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> <20230311091409.4f125e53@hermes.local>
In-Reply-To: <20230311091409.4f125e53@hermes.local>
From:   Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 12 Mar 2023 08:04:23 +0800
Message-ID: <CAL+tcoAUGyDS=khx7W8V79wck2HAFa2JFsY4-182ASy5m9w+Pw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: introduce budget_squeeze to help us tune rx behavior
To:     stephen@networkplumber.org
Cc:     davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
        pabeni@redhat.com, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
        hawk@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kuniyu@amazon.com,
        liuhangbin@gmail.com, xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com, jiri@nvidia.com,
        bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jason Xing <kernelxing@tencent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Mar 12, 2023 at 1:14=E2=80=AFAM Stephen Hemminger
<stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2023 00:36:14 +0800
> Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > -     for (;;) {
> > +     for (; is_continue;) {
>
>
> Easier to read this as a
>         while (is_continue) {
>
> but what is wrong with using break; instead?

If we hit the budget limit and 'break;' immediately, we may miss the
collection when we also hit the time limit. That's why I would like to
know if we hit both of them.

Thank,
Jason