All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 3/3] virtio-net: rx busy polling support
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 11:13:05 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53CC8541.8090006@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140720203111.GE2536@redhat.com>

On 07/21/2014 04:31 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 02:21:47PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> Add basic support for rx busy polling.
>>
>> Test was done between a kvm guest and an external host. Two hosts were
>> connected through 40gb mlx4 cards. With both busy_poll and busy_read
>> are set to 50 in guest, 1 byte netperf tcp_rr shows 116% improvement:
>> transaction rate was increased from 9151.94 to 19787.37.
> Pls include data about non polling tests: any effect on
> cpu utilization there?
> There could be as we are adding locking.

I will do some test on this.
>
>> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
>> Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 190 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 187 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> index e417d93..4830713 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>>  #include <linux/cpu.h>
>>  #include <linux/average.h>
>> +#include <net/busy_poll.h>
>>  
>>  static int napi_weight = NAPI_POLL_WEIGHT;
>>  module_param(napi_weight, int, 0444);
>> @@ -94,8 +95,143 @@ struct receive_queue {
>>  
>>  	/* Name of this receive queue: input.$index */
>>  	char name[40];
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
>> +	unsigned int state;
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_IDLE        0
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI	     1    /* NAPI or refill owns this RQ */
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL	     2    /* poll owns this RQ */
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED    4    /* RQ is disabled */
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_OWNED (VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI | VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL)
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_LOCKED (VIRTNET_RQ_OWNED | VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED)
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI_YIELD  8    /* NAPI or refill yielded this RQ */
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL_YIELD  16   /* poll yielded this RQ */
>> +	spinlock_t lock;
>> +#endif  /* CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL */
> do we have to have a new state? no way to reuse the napi state
> for this? two lock/unlock operations for a poll seems
> excessive.

I try this way and it works. The only usage I can think of introducing
those states is to detect the yield and do some optimizations after. But
only few drivers (bnx2x) use the yield flag.

I think I can  switch to use NAPI state since we don't do such
optimization in virtio-net.
>
>>  };
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
>> +static inline void virtnet_rq_init_lock(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_init(&rq->lock);
>> +	rq->state = VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_IDLE;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* called from the device poll routine or refill routine to get ownership of a
>> + * receive queue.
>> + */
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_lock_napi_refill(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = true;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock(&rq->lock);
>> +	if (rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_LOCKED) {
>> +		WARN_ON(rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI);
>> +		rq->state |= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI_YIELD;
>> +		rc = false;
>> +	} else
>> +		/* we don't care if someone yielded */
>> +		rq->state = VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI;
>> +	spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* returns true is someone tried to get the rq while napi or refill had it */
> s/is/if/
>
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_unlock_napi_refill(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = false;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock(&rq->lock);
>> +	WARN_ON(rq->state & (VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL |
>> +			     VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI_YIELD));
>> +
>> +	if (rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL_YIELD)
>> +		rc = true;
>> +	/* will reset state to idle, unless RQ is disabled */
>> +	rq->state &= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED;
>> +	spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* called from virtnet_low_latency_recv() */
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_lock_poll(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = true;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	if ((rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_LOCKED)) {
>> +		rq->state |= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL_YIELD;
>> +		rc = false;
>> +	} else
>> +		/* preserve yield marks */
>> +		rq->state |= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL;
>> +	spin_unlock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* returns true if someone tried to get the receive queue while it was locked */
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_unlock_poll(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = false;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	WARN_ON(rq->state & (VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI));
>> +
>> +	if (rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL_YIELD)
>> +		rc = true;
>> +	/* will reset state to idle, unless RQ is disabled */
>> +	rq->state &= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED;
>> +	spin_unlock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* return false if RQ is currently owned */
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_disable(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = true;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	if (rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_OWNED)
>> +		rc = false;
>> +	rq->state |= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED;
>> +	spin_unlock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#else /* CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL */
>> +static inline void virtnet_rq_init_lock(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_lock_napi_refill(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return true;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_unlock_napi_refill(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_lock_poll(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_unlock_poll(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_disable(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return true;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL */
>> +
>>  struct virtnet_info {
>>  	struct virtio_device *vdev;
>>  	struct virtqueue *cvq;
>> @@ -521,6 +657,8 @@ static void receive_buf(struct receive_queue *rq, void *buf, unsigned int len)
>>  		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs = 0;
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	skb_mark_napi_id(skb, &rq->napi);
>> +
>>  	netif_receive_skb(skb);
>>  	return;
>>  
>> @@ -714,7 +852,12 @@ static void refill_work(struct work_struct *work)
>>  		struct receive_queue *rq = &vi->rq[i];
>>  
>>  		napi_disable(&rq->napi);
>> +		if (!virtnet_rq_lock_napi_refill(rq)) {
>> +			virtnet_napi_enable(rq);
>> +			continue;
>> +		}
>>  		still_empty = !try_fill_recv(rq, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +		virtnet_rq_unlock_napi_refill(rq);
>>  		virtnet_napi_enable(rq);
>>  
>>  		/* In theory, this can happen: if we don't get any buffers in
>> @@ -752,8 +895,13 @@ static int virtnet_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
>>  	unsigned int r, received = 0;
>>  
>>  again:
>> +	if (!virtnet_rq_lock_napi_refill(rq))
>> +		return budget;
>> +
>>  	received += virtnet_receive(rq, budget);
>>  
>> +	virtnet_rq_unlock_napi_refill(rq);
>> +
>>  	/* Out of packets? */
>>  	if (received < budget) {
>>  		r = virtqueue_enable_cb_prepare(rq->vq);
>> @@ -770,20 +918,50 @@ again:
>>  	return received;
>>  }
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
>> +/* must be called with local_bh_disable()d */
>> +static int virtnet_low_latency_recv(struct napi_struct *napi)
> let's call it busy poll :)

Ok.
>> +{
>> +	struct receive_queue *rq =
>> +		container_of(napi, struct receive_queue, napi);
>> +	struct virtnet_info *vi = rq->vq->vdev->priv;
>> +	int received;
>> +
>> +	if (!(vi->status & VIRTIO_NET_S_LINK_UP))
>> +		return LL_FLUSH_FAILED;
>> +
>> +	if (!virtnet_rq_lock_poll(rq))
>> +		return LL_FLUSH_BUSY;
>> +
>> +	received = virtnet_receive(rq, 4);
> Hmm why 4 exactly?

I think the reason is we need a quota here to prevent the busy polling
method from starving other threads. 4 is just copied form the existed
implementation (ixgbe).
>> +
>> +	virtnet_rq_unlock_poll(rq);
>> +
>> +	return received;
>> +}
>> +#endif	/* CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL */
>> +
>>  static void virtnet_napi_enable_all(struct virtnet_info *vi)
>>  {
>>  	int i;
>>  
>> -	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++)
>> +	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
>> +		virtnet_rq_init_lock(&vi->rq[i]);
>>  		virtnet_napi_enable(&vi->rq[i]);
>> +	}
>>  }
>>  
>>  static void virtnet_napi_disable_all(struct virtnet_info *vi)
>>  {
>>  	int i;
>>  
>> -	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++)
>> +	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
>>  		napi_disable(&vi->rq[i].napi);
>> +		while (!virtnet_rq_disable(&vi->rq[i])) {
>> +			pr_info("RQ %d locked\n", i);
>> +			usleep_range(1000, 20000);
> What's going on here, exactly?

It was used to wait for the completion of busy polling to finish.
>> +		}
>> +	}
>>  }
>>  
>>  static int virtnet_open(struct net_device *dev)
>> @@ -1372,6 +1550,9 @@ static const struct net_device_ops virtnet_netdev = {
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_NET_POLL_CONTROLLER
>>  	.ndo_poll_controller = virtnet_netpoll,
>>  #endif
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
>> +	.ndo_busy_poll		= virtnet_low_latency_recv,
>> +#endif
>>  };
>>  
>>  static void virtnet_config_changed_work(struct work_struct *work)
>> @@ -1577,6 +1758,7 @@ static int virtnet_alloc_queues(struct virtnet_info *vi)
>>  		vi->rq[i].pages = NULL;
>>  		netif_napi_add(vi->dev, &vi->rq[i].napi, virtnet_poll,
>>  			       napi_weight);
>> +		napi_hash_add(&vi->rq[i].napi);
>>  
>>  		sg_init_table(vi->rq[i].sg, ARRAY_SIZE(vi->rq[i].sg));
>>  		ewma_init(&vi->rq[i].mrg_avg_pkt_len, 1, RECEIVE_AVG_WEIGHT);
>> @@ -1880,8 +2062,10 @@ static int virtnet_freeze(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>>  
>>  	if (netif_running(vi->dev)) {
>>  		virtnet_napi_disable_all(vi);
>> -		for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++)
>> +		for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
>> +			napi_hash_del(&vi->rq[i].napi);
>>  			netif_napi_del(&vi->rq[i].napi);
>> +		}
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	remove_vq_common(vi);
>> -- 
>> 1.8.3.1

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: rusty@rustcorp.com.au, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 3/3] virtio-net: rx busy polling support
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 11:13:05 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53CC8541.8090006@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140720203111.GE2536@redhat.com>

On 07/21/2014 04:31 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 02:21:47PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> Add basic support for rx busy polling.
>>
>> Test was done between a kvm guest and an external host. Two hosts were
>> connected through 40gb mlx4 cards. With both busy_poll and busy_read
>> are set to 50 in guest, 1 byte netperf tcp_rr shows 116% improvement:
>> transaction rate was increased from 9151.94 to 19787.37.
> Pls include data about non polling tests: any effect on
> cpu utilization there?
> There could be as we are adding locking.

I will do some test on this.
>
>> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
>> Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 190 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 187 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> index e417d93..4830713 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>>  #include <linux/cpu.h>
>>  #include <linux/average.h>
>> +#include <net/busy_poll.h>
>>  
>>  static int napi_weight = NAPI_POLL_WEIGHT;
>>  module_param(napi_weight, int, 0444);
>> @@ -94,8 +95,143 @@ struct receive_queue {
>>  
>>  	/* Name of this receive queue: input.$index */
>>  	char name[40];
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
>> +	unsigned int state;
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_IDLE        0
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI	     1    /* NAPI or refill owns this RQ */
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL	     2    /* poll owns this RQ */
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED    4    /* RQ is disabled */
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_OWNED (VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI | VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL)
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_LOCKED (VIRTNET_RQ_OWNED | VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED)
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI_YIELD  8    /* NAPI or refill yielded this RQ */
>> +#define VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL_YIELD  16   /* poll yielded this RQ */
>> +	spinlock_t lock;
>> +#endif  /* CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL */
> do we have to have a new state? no way to reuse the napi state
> for this? two lock/unlock operations for a poll seems
> excessive.

I try this way and it works. The only usage I can think of introducing
those states is to detect the yield and do some optimizations after. But
only few drivers (bnx2x) use the yield flag.

I think I can  switch to use NAPI state since we don't do such
optimization in virtio-net.
>
>>  };
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
>> +static inline void virtnet_rq_init_lock(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_init(&rq->lock);
>> +	rq->state = VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_IDLE;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* called from the device poll routine or refill routine to get ownership of a
>> + * receive queue.
>> + */
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_lock_napi_refill(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = true;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock(&rq->lock);
>> +	if (rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_LOCKED) {
>> +		WARN_ON(rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI);
>> +		rq->state |= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI_YIELD;
>> +		rc = false;
>> +	} else
>> +		/* we don't care if someone yielded */
>> +		rq->state = VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI;
>> +	spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* returns true is someone tried to get the rq while napi or refill had it */
> s/is/if/
>
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_unlock_napi_refill(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = false;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock(&rq->lock);
>> +	WARN_ON(rq->state & (VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL |
>> +			     VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI_YIELD));
>> +
>> +	if (rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL_YIELD)
>> +		rc = true;
>> +	/* will reset state to idle, unless RQ is disabled */
>> +	rq->state &= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED;
>> +	spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* called from virtnet_low_latency_recv() */
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_lock_poll(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = true;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	if ((rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_LOCKED)) {
>> +		rq->state |= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL_YIELD;
>> +		rc = false;
>> +	} else
>> +		/* preserve yield marks */
>> +		rq->state |= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL;
>> +	spin_unlock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* returns true if someone tried to get the receive queue while it was locked */
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_unlock_poll(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = false;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	WARN_ON(rq->state & (VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_NAPI));
>> +
>> +	if (rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_POLL_YIELD)
>> +		rc = true;
>> +	/* will reset state to idle, unless RQ is disabled */
>> +	rq->state &= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED;
>> +	spin_unlock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* return false if RQ is currently owned */
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_disable(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	int rc = true;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +	if (rq->state & VIRTNET_RQ_OWNED)
>> +		rc = false;
>> +	rq->state |= VIRTNET_RQ_STATE_DISABLED;
>> +	spin_unlock_bh(&rq->lock);
>> +
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#else /* CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL */
>> +static inline void virtnet_rq_init_lock(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_lock_napi_refill(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return true;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_unlock_napi_refill(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_lock_poll(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_unlock_poll(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline bool virtnet_rq_disable(struct receive_queue *rq)
>> +{
>> +	return true;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL */
>> +
>>  struct virtnet_info {
>>  	struct virtio_device *vdev;
>>  	struct virtqueue *cvq;
>> @@ -521,6 +657,8 @@ static void receive_buf(struct receive_queue *rq, void *buf, unsigned int len)
>>  		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs = 0;
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	skb_mark_napi_id(skb, &rq->napi);
>> +
>>  	netif_receive_skb(skb);
>>  	return;
>>  
>> @@ -714,7 +852,12 @@ static void refill_work(struct work_struct *work)
>>  		struct receive_queue *rq = &vi->rq[i];
>>  
>>  		napi_disable(&rq->napi);
>> +		if (!virtnet_rq_lock_napi_refill(rq)) {
>> +			virtnet_napi_enable(rq);
>> +			continue;
>> +		}
>>  		still_empty = !try_fill_recv(rq, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +		virtnet_rq_unlock_napi_refill(rq);
>>  		virtnet_napi_enable(rq);
>>  
>>  		/* In theory, this can happen: if we don't get any buffers in
>> @@ -752,8 +895,13 @@ static int virtnet_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
>>  	unsigned int r, received = 0;
>>  
>>  again:
>> +	if (!virtnet_rq_lock_napi_refill(rq))
>> +		return budget;
>> +
>>  	received += virtnet_receive(rq, budget);
>>  
>> +	virtnet_rq_unlock_napi_refill(rq);
>> +
>>  	/* Out of packets? */
>>  	if (received < budget) {
>>  		r = virtqueue_enable_cb_prepare(rq->vq);
>> @@ -770,20 +918,50 @@ again:
>>  	return received;
>>  }
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
>> +/* must be called with local_bh_disable()d */
>> +static int virtnet_low_latency_recv(struct napi_struct *napi)
> let's call it busy poll :)

Ok.
>> +{
>> +	struct receive_queue *rq =
>> +		container_of(napi, struct receive_queue, napi);
>> +	struct virtnet_info *vi = rq->vq->vdev->priv;
>> +	int received;
>> +
>> +	if (!(vi->status & VIRTIO_NET_S_LINK_UP))
>> +		return LL_FLUSH_FAILED;
>> +
>> +	if (!virtnet_rq_lock_poll(rq))
>> +		return LL_FLUSH_BUSY;
>> +
>> +	received = virtnet_receive(rq, 4);
> Hmm why 4 exactly?

I think the reason is we need a quota here to prevent the busy polling
method from starving other threads. 4 is just copied form the existed
implementation (ixgbe).
>> +
>> +	virtnet_rq_unlock_poll(rq);
>> +
>> +	return received;
>> +}
>> +#endif	/* CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL */
>> +
>>  static void virtnet_napi_enable_all(struct virtnet_info *vi)
>>  {
>>  	int i;
>>  
>> -	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++)
>> +	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
>> +		virtnet_rq_init_lock(&vi->rq[i]);
>>  		virtnet_napi_enable(&vi->rq[i]);
>> +	}
>>  }
>>  
>>  static void virtnet_napi_disable_all(struct virtnet_info *vi)
>>  {
>>  	int i;
>>  
>> -	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++)
>> +	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
>>  		napi_disable(&vi->rq[i].napi);
>> +		while (!virtnet_rq_disable(&vi->rq[i])) {
>> +			pr_info("RQ %d locked\n", i);
>> +			usleep_range(1000, 20000);
> What's going on here, exactly?

It was used to wait for the completion of busy polling to finish.
>> +		}
>> +	}
>>  }
>>  
>>  static int virtnet_open(struct net_device *dev)
>> @@ -1372,6 +1550,9 @@ static const struct net_device_ops virtnet_netdev = {
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_NET_POLL_CONTROLLER
>>  	.ndo_poll_controller = virtnet_netpoll,
>>  #endif
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_RX_BUSY_POLL
>> +	.ndo_busy_poll		= virtnet_low_latency_recv,
>> +#endif
>>  };
>>  
>>  static void virtnet_config_changed_work(struct work_struct *work)
>> @@ -1577,6 +1758,7 @@ static int virtnet_alloc_queues(struct virtnet_info *vi)
>>  		vi->rq[i].pages = NULL;
>>  		netif_napi_add(vi->dev, &vi->rq[i].napi, virtnet_poll,
>>  			       napi_weight);
>> +		napi_hash_add(&vi->rq[i].napi);
>>  
>>  		sg_init_table(vi->rq[i].sg, ARRAY_SIZE(vi->rq[i].sg));
>>  		ewma_init(&vi->rq[i].mrg_avg_pkt_len, 1, RECEIVE_AVG_WEIGHT);
>> @@ -1880,8 +2062,10 @@ static int virtnet_freeze(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>>  
>>  	if (netif_running(vi->dev)) {
>>  		virtnet_napi_disable_all(vi);
>> -		for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++)
>> +		for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
>> +			napi_hash_del(&vi->rq[i].napi);
>>  			netif_napi_del(&vi->rq[i].napi);
>> +		}
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	remove_vq_common(vi);
>> -- 
>> 1.8.3.1


  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-21  3:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-16  6:21 [PATCH net-next V2 0/3] rx busy polling support for virtio-net Jason Wang
2014-07-16  6:21 ` Jason Wang
2014-07-16  6:21 ` [PATCH net-next V2 1/3] virtio-net: introduce helpers to enable and disable all NAPIs Jason Wang
2014-07-16  6:21   ` Jason Wang
2014-07-16  6:21 ` [PATCH net-next V2 2/3] virtio-net: introduce virtnet_receive() Jason Wang
2014-07-16  6:21   ` Jason Wang
2014-07-16  6:21 ` [PATCH net-next V2 3/3] virtio-net: rx busy polling support Jason Wang
2014-07-16  6:21   ` Jason Wang
2014-07-16  8:38   ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-17  2:55     ` Jason Wang
2014-07-17  3:27       ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-17  4:43         ` Jason Wang
2014-07-17  4:54           ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-20 20:31   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-07-20 20:31     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-07-21  3:13     ` Jason Wang [this message]
2014-07-21  3:13       ` Jason Wang
2014-07-17  6:21 ` [PATCH net-next V2 0/3] rx busy polling support for virtio-net David Miller
2014-07-17  6:21   ` David Miller
2014-07-17  6:59   ` Jason Wang
2014-07-17  6:59     ` Jason Wang
2014-07-20 20:34 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-07-20 20:34   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-07-21  3:15   ` Jason Wang
2014-07-21  3:15     ` Jason Wang

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=53CC8541.8090006@redhat.com \
    --to=jasowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vyasevic@redhat.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.