On 01/25/2016 03:58 PM, Michael Rapoport wrote:

(restored 'CC, sorry for dropping it originally, Notes is still hard
for me)

quoted

Jason Wang [off-list ref] wrote on 01/25/2016 05:00:05 AM:
On 01/24/2016 05:00 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:

quoted

Hi Jason,

quoted

Jason Wang <jasowang <at> redhat.com> writes:

Hi all:

This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The

idea is

quoted

quoted

quoted

simple: at the end of tx/rx processing, busy polling for new tx added
descriptor and rx receive socket for a while.

There were several conciens Michael raised on the Razya's attempt

to add

quoted

quoted

polling to vhost-net ([1], [2]). Some of them seem relevant for these
patches as well:

- What happens in overcommit scenarios?

We have an optimization here: busy polling will end if more than one
processes is runnable on local cpu. This was done by checking
single_task_running() in each iteration. So at the worst case, busy
polling should be as fast as or only a minor regression compared to
normal case. You can see this from the last test result.

quoted

- Have you checked the effect of polling on some macro benchmarks?

I'm not sure I get the question. Cover letters shows some benchmark
result of netperf. What do you mean by "macro benchmarks"?

Back then, when Razya posted her polling implementation, Michael had
concern about the macro effect ([3]),
so I was wondering if this concern is also valid for your implementation.
Now, after I've reread your changes, I think it's not that relevant...

More benchmarks is good, but lots of kernel patches were accepted only
with simple netperf results. Anyway busy polling is disabled by default,
will try to do macro benchmark in the future if I had time.

quoted

quoted

quoted

The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was
specified ioctl.

Although ioctl is definitely more appropriate interface to allow

user to

quoted

quoted

tune polling, it's still not clear for me how *end user* will

interact with

quoted

quoted

it and how easy it would be for him/her.

There will be qemu part of the codes for end user. E.g. a vhost_poll_us
parameter for tap like:

-netdev tap,id=hn0,vhost=on,vhost_pull_us=20

Not strictly related, I'd like to give a try to polling + vhost thread
sharing and polling + workqueues.
Do you mind sharing the scripts you used to test the polling?

Sure, it was a subtest of autotest[1].

[1]
https://github.com/autotest/tp-qemu/blob/7cf589b490aff7511eccbf2e1336ecf8d9fa9cb9/generic/tests/netperf.py

 
Thanks,
Mike.

quoted

Thanks

quoted

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1765593
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.kvm.devel/131343

--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.

[3] https://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@vger.kernel.org/msg109703.html