[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190405081648.2zflr7gxknk4q3a2@steredhat>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 10:16:48 +0200
From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] vsock/virtio: reduce credit update messages
On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 08:15:39PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 12:58:35PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > @@ -256,6 +257,7 @@ virtio_transport_stream_do_dequeue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
> > struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs = vsk->trans;
> > struct virtio_vsock_pkt *pkt;
> > size_t bytes, total = 0;
> > + s64 free_space;
>
> Why s64? buf_alloc, fwd_cnt, and last_fwd_cnt are all u32. fwd_cnt -
> last_fwd_cnt <= buf_alloc is always true.
>
Right, I'll use a u32 for free_space!
Is is a leftover because initially I implemented something like
virtio_transport_has_space().
> > int err = -EFAULT;
> >
> > spin_lock_bh(&vvs->rx_lock);
> > @@ -288,9 +290,15 @@ virtio_transport_stream_do_dequeue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
> > }
> > spin_unlock_bh(&vvs->rx_lock);
> >
> > - /* Send a credit pkt to peer */
> > - virtio_transport_send_credit_update(vsk, VIRTIO_VSOCK_TYPE_STREAM,
> > - NULL);
> > + /* We send a credit update only when the space available seen
> > + * by the transmitter is less than VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE
> > + */
> > + free_space = vvs->buf_alloc - (vvs->fwd_cnt - vvs->last_fwd_cnt);
>
> Locking? These fields should be accessed under tx_lock.
>
Yes, we need a lock, but looking in the code, vvs->fwd_cnd is written
taking rx_lock (virtio_transport_dec_rx_pkt) and it is read with the
tx_lock (virtio_transport_inc_tx_pkt).
Maybe we should use another spin_lock shared between RX and TX for those
fields or use atomic variables.
What do you suggest?
Thanks,
Stefano
Powered by blists - more mailing lists