[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <874o54h4rt.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 14:03:26 +0930
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
linux390@...ibm.com, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Shirley Ma <xma@...ibm.com>, lguest@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@...ibm.com>,
Tom Lendacky <tahm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, steved@...ibm.com,
habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/18] virtio: use avail_event index
On Wed, 4 May 2011 23:51:47 +0300, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> Use the new avail_event feature to reduce the number
> of exits from the guest.
Figures here would be nice :)
> @@ -228,6 +237,12 @@ add_head:
> * new available array entries. */
> virtio_wmb();
> vq->vring.avail->idx++;
> + /* If the driver never bothers to kick in a very long while,
> + * avail index might wrap around. If that happens, invalidate
> + * kicked_avail index we stored. TODO: make sure all drivers
> + * kick at least once in 2^16 and remove this. */
> + if (unlikely(vq->vring.avail->idx == vq->kicked_avail))
> + vq->kicked_avail_valid = true;
If they don't, they're already buggy. Simply do:
WARN_ON(vq->vring.avail->idx == vq->kicked_avail);
> +static bool vring_notify(struct vring_virtqueue *vq)
> +{
> + u16 old, new;
> + bool v;
> + if (!vq->event)
> + return !(vq->vring.used->flags & VRING_USED_F_NO_NOTIFY);
> +
> + v = vq->kicked_avail_valid;
> + old = vq->kicked_avail;
> + new = vq->kicked_avail = vq->vring.avail->idx;
> + vq->kicked_avail_valid = true;
> + if (unlikely(!v))
> + return true;
This is the only place you actually used kicked_avail_valid. Is it
possible to initialize it in such a way that you can remove this?
> @@ -482,6 +517,8 @@ void vring_transport_features(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> break;
> case VIRTIO_RING_F_USED_EVENT_IDX:
> break;
> + case VIRTIO_RING_F_AVAIL_EVENT_IDX:
> + break;
> default:
> /* We don't understand this bit. */
> clear_bit(i, vdev->features);
Does this belong in a prior patch?
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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