[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1417661734.16500.0@smtp.corp.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 03:03:34 +0008
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, dgibson@...hat.com,
vfalico@...il.com, edumazet@...gle.com, vyasevic@...hat.com,
hkchu@...gle.com, wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xemul@...allels.com,
therbert@...gle.com, bhutchings@...arflare.com, xii@...gle.com,
stephen@...workplumber.org, jiri@...nulli.us,
sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/2 tuntap: Increase the number of queues in
tun.
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 12:49:37PM +0530, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
>> Networking under kvm works best if we allocate a per-vCPU RX and TX
>> queue in a virtual NIC. This requires a per-vCPU queue on the host
>> side.
>>
>> It is now safe to increase the maximum number of queues.
>> Preceding patche: 'net: allow large number of rx queues'
>
> s/patche/patch/
>
>> made sure this won't cause failures due to high order memory
>> allocations. Increase it to 256: this is the max number of vCPUs
>> KVM supports.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@...hat.com>
>> Reviewed-by: David Gibson <dgibson@...hat.com>
>
> Hmm it's kind of nasty that each tun device is now using x16 memory.
> Maybe we should look at using a flex array instead, and removing the
> limitation altogether (e.g. make it INT_MAX)?
But this only happens when IFF_MULTIQUEUE were used.
And core has vmalloc() fallback.
So probably not a big issue?
>
>
>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/tun.c | 9 +++++----
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
>> index e3fa65a..a19dc5f8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
>> @@ -113,10 +113,11 @@ struct tap_filter {
>> unsigned char addr[FLT_EXACT_COUNT][ETH_ALEN];
>> };
>>
>> -/* DEFAULT_MAX_NUM_RSS_QUEUES were chosen to let the rx/tx queues
>> allocated for
>> - * the netdevice to be fit in one page. So we can make sure the
>> success of
>> - * memory allocation. TODO: increase the limit. */
>> -#define MAX_TAP_QUEUES DEFAULT_MAX_NUM_RSS_QUEUES
>> +/* MAX_TAP_QUEUES 256 is chosen to allow rx/tx queues to be equal
>> + * to max number of vCPUS in guest. Also, we are making sure here
>> + * queue memory allocation do not fail.
>
> It's not queue memory allocation anymore, is it?
> I would say "
> This also helps the tfiles field fit in 4K, so the whole tun
> device only needs an order-1 allocation.
> "
>
>> + */
>> +#define MAX_TAP_QUEUES 256
>> #define MAX_TAP_FLOWS 4096
>>
>> #define TUN_FLOW_EXPIRE (3 * HZ)
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
>>
>> --
>> 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
--
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