[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1243930422.9146.60.camel@blaa>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:13:42 +0100
From: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@...hat.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] virtio_net: don't free buffers in xmit ring
On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 23:46 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> The virtio_net driver is complicated by the two methods of freeing old
> xmit buffers (in addition to freeing old ones at the start of the xmit
> path).
>
> The original code used a 1/10 second timer attached to xmit_free(),
> reset on every xmit. Before we orphaned skbs on xmit, the
> transmitting userspace could block with a full socket until the timer
> fired, the skb destructor was called, and they were re-woken.
The timer was actually added to solve a hang when trying to unload
nf_conntrack AFAIR - nf_conntrack was blocking on the skb being freed
and we never actually freed it.
I think skb_orphan() is enough to prevent this, is it?
> So we added the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFY_ON_EMPTY feature: supporting devices
> send an interrupt (even if normally suppressed) on an empty xmit ring
> which makes us schedule xmit_tasklet(). This was a benchmark win.
>
> Unfortunately, VIRTIO_F_NOTIFY_ON_EMPTY makes quite a lot of work: a
> host which is faster than the guest will fire the interrupt every xmit
> packet (slowing the guest down further).
Ouch. So, does simply disabling host support for
VIRTIO_F_NOTIFY_ON_EMPTY speed up current guests?
Cheers,
Mark.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists