lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 30 May 2010 14:22:20 +0300
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@...hat.com>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	qemu-devel@...gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2-RFC 0/2] virtio: put last seen used index into ring
	itself

On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 11:56:54AM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> On 05/26/10 21:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Here's a rewrite of the original patch with a new layout.
> > I haven't tested it yet so no idea how this performs, but
> > I think this addresses the cache bounce issue raised by Avi.
> > Posting for early flames/comments.
> > 
> > Generally, the Host end of the virtio ring doesn't need to see where
> > Guest is up to in consuming the ring.  However, to completely understand
> > what's going on from the outside, this information must be exposed.
> > For example, host can reduce the number of interrupts by detecting
> > that the guest is currently handling previous buffers.
> > 
> > We add a feature bit so the guest can tell the host that it's writing
> > out the current value there, if it wants to use that.
> > 
> > This differs from original approach in that the used index
> > is put after avail index (they are typically written out together).
> > To avoid cache bounces on descriptor access,
> > and make future extensions easier, we put the ring itself at start of
> > page, and move the control after it.
> 
> Hi Michael,
> 
> It looks pretty good to me, however one thing I have been thinking of
> while reading through it:
> 
> Rather than storing a pointer within the ring struct, pointing into a
> position within the same struct. How about storing a byte offset instead
> and using a cast to get to the pointer position? That would avoid the
> pointer dereference, which is less effective cache wise and harder for
> the CPU to predict.
> 
> Not sure whether it really matters performance wise, just a thought.
> 
> Cheers,
> Jes

I think this won't work: when PUBLUSH_USED_IDX is negotiated,
the pointer is to within the ring.

-- 
MST
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists