[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <05620625-AB73-4645-97C4-3CC07022049D@nutanix.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 16:43:09 +0000
From: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Eugenio Pérez
<eperezma@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"virtualization@...ts.linux.dev" <virtualization@...ts.linux.dev>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] vhost/net: check peek_head_len after signal to
guest to avoid delays
> On Nov 26, 2025, at 3:56 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 11:00:33AM -0700, Jon Kohler wrote:
>> In non-busypoll handle_rx paths, if peek_head_len returns 0, the RX
>> loop breaks, the RX wait queue is re-enabled, and vhost_net_signal_used
>> is called to flush done_idx and notify the guest if needed.
>>
>> However, signaling the guest can take non-trivial time. During this
>> window, additional RX payloads may arrive on rx_ring without further
>> kicks. These new payloads will sit unprocessed until another kick
>> arrives, increasing latency. In high-rate UDP RX workloads, this was
>> observed to occur over 20k times per second.
>>
>> To minimize this window and improve opportunities to process packets
>> promptly, immediately call peek_head_len after signaling. If new packets
>> are found, treat it as a busy poll interrupt and requeue handle_rx,
>> improving fairness to TX handlers and other pending CPU work. This also
>> helps suppress unnecessary thread wakeups, reducing waker CPU demand.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/vhost/net.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c
>> index 35ded4330431..04cb5f1dc6e4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/vhost/net.c
>> +++ b/drivers/vhost/net.c
>> @@ -1015,6 +1015,27 @@ static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk,
>> struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq = &tnvq->vq;
>> int len = peek_head_len(rnvq, sk);
>>
>> + if (!len && rnvq->done_idx) {
>> + /* When idle, flush signal first, which can take some
>> + * time for ring management and guest notification.
>> + * Afterwards, check one last time for work, as the ring
>> + * may have received new work during the notification
>> + * window.
>> + */
>> + vhost_net_signal_used(rnvq, *count);
>> + *count = 0;
>> + if (peek_head_len(rnvq, sk)) {
>
>
> I also wonder why don't we assign len here.
> I get the point about being fair to TX but it's not
> indefinite poll, just a single peek …
The first version I made of this patch did this. It works,
but I liked the idea of having baked in fairness design
wise. It could go either way though?
The nice bit about deferring to the TX handler (or other
work) is that you’d then naturally batch up more work,
so the ebb n flow should be nicer in a mixed load environment
Thoughts?
>> + /* More work came in during the notification
>> + * window. To be fair to the TX handler and other
>> + * potentially pending work items, pretend like
>> + * this was a busy poll interruption so that
>> + * the RX handler will be rescheduled and try
>> + * again.
>> + */
>> + *busyloop_intr = true;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> if (!len && rvq->busyloop_timeout) {
>> /* Flush batched heads first */
>> vhost_net_signal_used(rnvq, *count);
>> --
>> 2.43.0
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists