Re: [PATCH 2/2] vhost: lockless enqueuing
From: Pankaj Gupta <hidden>
Date: 2016-04-26 07:57:14
Also in:
kvm, lkml, virtualization
From: Pankaj Gupta <hidden>
Date: 2016-04-26 07:57:14
Also in:
kvm, lkml, virtualization
On 04/26/2016 02:24 PM, Pankaj Gupta wrote:quoted
Hi Jason, Overall patches look good. Just one doubt I have is below:quoted
We use spinlock to synchronize the work list now which may cause unnecessary contentions. So this patch switch to use llist to remove this contention. Pktgen tests shows about 5% improvement: Before: ~1300000 pps After: ~1370000 pps Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> --- drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- drivers/vhost/vhost.h | 7 ++++--- 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)[...]quoted
quoted
- if (work) { + node = llist_del_all(&dev->work_list); + if (!node) + schedule(); + + node = llist_reverse_order(node);Can we avoid llist reverse here?Probably not, this is because: - we should process the work exactly the same order as they were queued, otherwise flush won't work - llist can only add a node to the head of list.
Got it. Thanks,
Thanks