[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111207154816.GA23845@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 17:48:17 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
markmc@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-ring: Use threshold for switching to indirect
descriptors
On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 04:02:45PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-12-04 at 20:23 +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> Rusty, Michael, does the below looks a reasonable optimization for you?
OK overall but a bit hard to say for sure as it looks pretty incomplete ...
> should I send it as a patch?
What's the performance gain?
> > Something like the following patch:
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > index c7a2c20..3166ca0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > @@ -82,6 +82,7 @@ struct vring_virtqueue
> >
> > /* Host supports indirect buffers */
> > bool indirect;
> > + struct kmem_cache *indirect_cache;
> >
> > /* Host publishes avail event idx */
> > bool event;
> > @@ -110,6 +111,9 @@ struct vring_virtqueue
> >
> > #define to_vvq(_vq) container_of(_vq, struct vring_virtqueue, vq)
> >
> > +static unsigned int ind_alloc_thresh = 0;
> > +module_param(ind_alloc_thresh, uint, S_IRUGO);
0 will have no effect?
> > +
> > /* Set up an indirect table of descriptors and add it to the queue. */
> > static int vring_add_indirect(struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > struct scatterlist sg[],
A global parameter is OK for testing but likely not what we want
in real life. This needs to be different per device.
> > @@ -121,7 +125,10 @@ static int vring_add_indirect(struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > unsigned head;
> > int i;
> >
> > - desc = kmalloc((out + in) * sizeof(struct vring_desc), gfp);
> > + if ((out + in) <= ind_alloc_thresh)
> > + desc = kmem_cache_alloc(vq->indirect_cache, gfp);
> > + else
> > + desc = kmalloc((out + in) * sizeof(struct vring_desc), gfp);
> > if (!desc)
> > return -ENOMEM;
> >
free unaffected?
> > @@ -479,6 +486,9 @@ struct virtqueue *vring_new_virtqueue(unsigned int num,
> > vq->broken = false;
> > vq->last_used_idx = 0;
> > vq->num_added = 0;
> > + if (ind_alloc_thresh)
> > + vq->indirect_cache = KMEM_CACHE(vring_desc[ind_alloc_thresh], 0);
and need to cleanup too?
> > list_add_tail(&vq->vq.list, &vdev->vqs);
> > #ifdef DEBUG
> > vq->in_use = false;
> >
>
> --
>
> Sasha.
--
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