From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] converting the block layer from coroutines to threads
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:01:13 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F47FA99.8050608@codemonkey.ws> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F47F685.5010000@redhat.com>
On 02/24/2012 02:43 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 08:22 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Virtio really wants each virtqueue to be processed in a separate
>> thread. On a multicore system, there's considerable improvement doing
>> this. I think that's where we ought to start.
>
> Well, that's where we ought to *get*. Stefan's work is awesome but with
> the current feature set it would be hard to justify it upstream.
>
> To get it upstream we need to generalize it and make it work well with
> the block layer. And vice versa make the block layer work well with
> threads, which is what I care about here.
>
>> We really just need the block layer to be re-entrant, we don't
>> actually need qcow2 or anything else that uses coroutines to use full
>> threads.
>
> Once you can issue I/O from two threads at the same-time (such as
> streaming in the iothread and guest I/O in the virtqueue thread),
> everything already needs to be thread-safe. It is a pretty short step
> from there to thread pools for everything.
If you start with a thread safe API for submitting block requests, that could be
implemented as
bapi_aiocb *bapi_submit_readv(bapi_driver *d, struct iovec *iov, int iovcnt,
off_t offset)
{
bapi_request *req = make_bapi_request(BAPI_READ, iov, iovcnt, offset);
return bapi_queue_add_req(req);
}
Which would schedule the I/O thread to actually implement the operation. You
could then start incrementally refactoring specific drivers to be re-entrant
(like linux-aio). But anything that already needs to use a thread pool to do
its I/O probably wouldn't benefit from threading virtio.
More importantly, the above would give you good performance to start with,
instead of refactoring a bunch of code hoping to eventually get to good performance.
>
>> Or at least, as far as I know, we don't have any performance data to
>> suggest that we do.
>
> No, it's not about speed, though of course it only works if there is no
> performance dip. It is just an enabling step.
>
> That said, my weekend officially begins now. :)
Enjoy!!
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
>
> Paolo
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-24 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-24 19:02 [Qemu-devel] converting the block layer from coroutines to threads Paolo Bonzini
2012-02-24 19:22 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-02-24 20:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-02-24 21:01 ` Anthony Liguori [this message]
2012-02-28 9:34 ` Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F47FA99.8050608@codemonkey.ws \
--to=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.