netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] vhost: TX used buffer guest signal accumulation

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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce 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]

Message-ID: <20101029081027.GB22688@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:10:27 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] vhost: TX used buffer guest signal accumulation

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 10:14:22AM -0700, Shirley Ma wrote:
> 
> > Two ideas:
> > 1. How about writing out used, just delaying the signal?
> >    This way we don't have to queue separately.
> 
> This improves some performance, but not as good as delaying
> both used and signal. Since delaying used buffers combining
> multiple small copies to a large copy, which saves more CPU
> utilization and increased some BW.

Hmm. I don't yet understand. We are still doing copies into the per-vq
buffer, and the data copied is really small.  Is it about cache line
bounces?  Could you try figuring it out?

> > 2. How about flushing out queued stuff before we exit
> >    the handle_tx loop? That would address most of
> >    the spec issue. 
> 
> The performance is almost as same as the previous patch. I will resubmit
> the modified one, adding vhost_add_used_and_signal_n after handle_tx
> loop for processing pending queue.
> 
> This patch was a part of modified macvtap zero copy which I haven't
> submitted yet. I found this helped vhost TX in general. This pending
> queue will be used by DMA done later, so I put it in vq instead of a
> local variable in handle_tx.
> 
> Thanks
> Shirley

BTW why do we need another array? Isn't heads field exactly what we need
here?

--
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