Re: [RFC v2 3/7] vsock: batch buffers in tx
From: Guo Zhi <hidden>
Date: 2022-08-26 03:11:45
Also in:
kvm, lkml
----- Original Message -----
From: "jasowang" <redacted> To: "Guo Zhi" <redacted>, "eperezma" <eperezma@redhat.com>, "sgarzare" <sgarzare@redhat.com>, "Michael Tsirkin" [off-list ref] Cc: "netdev" <redacted>, "linux-kernel" <redacted>, "kvm list" <redacted>, "virtualization" [off-list ref] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2022 3:08:58 PM Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/7] vsock: batch buffers in tx
在 2022/8/17 21:57, Guo Zhi 写道:quoted
Vsock uses buffers in order, and for tx driver doesn't have to know the length of the buffer. So we can do a batch for vsock if in order negotiated, only write one used ring for a batch of buffers Signed-off-by: Guo Zhi <redacted> --- drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c index 368330417bde..b0108009c39a 100644 --- a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c +++ b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c@@ -500,6 +500,7 @@ static void vhost_vsock_handle_tx_kick(struct vhost_work*work) int head, pkts = 0, total_len = 0; unsigned int out, in; bool added = false; + int last_head = -1; mutex_lock(&vq->mutex);@@ -551,10 +552,16 @@ static void vhost_vsock_handle_tx_kick(struct vhost_work*work) else virtio_transport_free_pkt(pkt); - vhost_add_used(vq, head, 0); + if (!vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER)) + vhost_add_used(vq, head, 0); + else + last_head = head; added = true; } while(likely(!vhost_exceeds_weight(vq, ++pkts, total_len))); + /* If in order feature negotiaged, we can do a batch to increase performance */ + if (vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER) && last_head != -1) + vhost_add_used(vq, last_head, 0);I may miss something but spec said "The device then skips forward in the ring according to the size of the batch. ". I don't see how it is done here. Thanks
It can skip them in __vhost_add_used_n if _F_IN_ORDER is negotiated. last_used_idx will be added by size of the batch.
quoted
no_more_replies: if (added) vhost_signal(&vsock->dev, vq);