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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:02:05 +0100
From:   Stefano Garzarella <>
To:     Jason Wang <>
Cc:     virtualization <>,
        netdev <>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <>,
        linux-kernel <>,
        kvm <>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] vhost: cache avail index in vhost_enable_notify()

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 02:18:01PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 10:57 PM Stefano Garzarella <> wrote:
>> In vhost_enable_notify() we enable the notifications and we read
>> the avail index to check if new buffers have become available in
>> the meantime. In this case, the device would go to re-read avail
>> index to access the descriptor.
>> As we already do in other place, we can cache the value in `avail_idx`
>> and compare it with `last_avail_idx` to check if there are new
>> buffers available.
>> Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <>
>Patch looks fine but I guess we won't get performance improvement
>since it doesn't save any userspace/VM memory access?

It should save the memory access when vhost_enable_notify() find 
something new in the VQ, so in this path:

     vhost_enable_notify() <- VM memory access for avail index
       == true


     vhost_get_vq_desc()   <- VM memory access for avail index
                              with the patch applied, this access is 
                              avoided since avail index is cached

In any case, I don't expect this to be a very common path, indeed we
usually use unlikely() for this path:

     if (unlikely(vhost_enable_notify(dev, vq))) {
         vhost_disable_notify(dev, vq);

So I don't expect a significant performance increase.

v1 coming with a better commit description.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists