From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong@cn.fujitsu.com>,
asias@redhat.com, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] virtio: new API for addition of buffers, scatterlist changes
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 15:31:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130207133133.GC21707@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5113AA35.3010209@redhat.com>
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 02:20:53PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 07/02/2013 14:23, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 02:14:24PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 07/02/2013 14:09, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
> >>>> One major difference between virtqueue_add_buf and virtqueue_add_sg
> >>>> is that the latter uses scatterlist iterators, which follow chained
> >>>> scatterlist structs and stop at ending markers. In order to avoid code
> >>>> duplication, and use the new API from virtqueue_add_buf (patch 8), we need
> >>>> to change all existing callers of virtqueue_add_buf to provide well-formed
> >>>> scatterlists. This is what patches 2-7 do. For virtio-blk it is easiest
> >>>> to just switch to the new API, just like for virtio-scsi. For virtio-net
> >>>> the ending marker must be reset after calling virtqueue_add_buf, in
> >>>> preparation for the next usage of the scatterlist. Other drivers are
> >>>> safe already.
> >>>
> >>> What are the changes as compared to the previous version?
> >>> How about some comments made on the previous version?
> >>> See e.g.
> >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1891541/
> >>
> >> Two changes: 1) added virtqueue_add_sg_single; 2) reimplemented
> >> virtqueue_add_buf in terms of the new API, which requires virtio-blk and
> >> virtio-net changes.
> >>
> >> The virtio-blk and virtio-net changes are based on some ideas in the
> >> patch Rusty posted, but virtio-net is a bit simpler and virtio-blk was
> >> redone from scratch.
> >>
> >>> Generally we have code for direct and indirect which is already
> >>> painful. We do not want 4 more variants of this code.
> >>
> >> Yes, indeed, the other main difference is that I'm now reimplementing
> >> virtqueue_add_buf using the new functions. So:
> >>
> >> - we previously had 2 variants (direct/indirect)
> >>
> >> - v1 had 4 variants (direct/indirect x add_buf/add_sg)
> >>
> >> - v2 has 4 variants (direct/indirect x add_sg/add_sg_single)
> >
> > single is never indirect so should have a single variant.
>
> Single means *this piece* (for example a request header) is single. It
> could still end up in an indirect buffer because QEMU does not support
> mixed direct/indirect buffers.
>
> Paolo
Yes but why is the optimization worth it?
It makes sense if all we want to do is add a single buffer
in one go, this would give us virtqueue_add_buf_single.
But if we are building up an s/g list anyway,
speeding up one of the entries a tiny bit
seems very unlikely to be measureable.
No?
> >>>> This is an RFC for two reasons. First, because I haven't done enough
> >>>> testing yet (especially with all the variations on receiving that
> >>>> virtio-net has). Second, because I still have two struct vring_desc *
> >>>> fields in virtqueue API, which is a layering violation. I'm not really
> >>>> sure how important that is and how to fix that---except by making the
> >>>> fields void*.
> >>>
> >>> Hide the whole structure as part of vring struct, the problem will go
> >>> away.
> >>
> >> Yes, that's the other possibility. Will do for the next submission.
> >>
> >> Paolo
> >>
> >>>> Paolo
> >>>> Paolo Bonzini (8):
> >>>> virtio: add functions for piecewise addition of buffers
> >>>> virtio-blk: reorganize virtblk_add_req
> >>>> virtio-blk: use virtqueue_start_buf on bio path
> >>>> virtio-blk: use virtqueue_start_buf on req path
> >>>> scatterlist: introduce sg_unmark_end
> >>>> virtio-net: unmark scatterlist ending after virtqueue_add_buf
> >>>> virtio-scsi: use virtqueue_start_buf
> >>>> virtio: reimplement virtqueue_add_buf using new functions
> >>>>
> >>>> block/blk-integrity.c | 2 +-
> >>>> block/blk-merge.c | 2 +-
> >>>> drivers/block/virtio_blk.c | 165 +++++++++--------
> >>>> drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 21 ++-
> >>>> drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c | 103 +++++------
> >>>> drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 417 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> >>>> include/linux/scatterlist.h | 16 ++
> >>>> include/linux/virtio.h | 25 +++
> >>>> 8 files changed, 460 insertions(+), 291 deletions(-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-07 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-07 12:22 [RFC PATCH 0/8] virtio: new API for addition of buffers, scatterlist changes Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 12:22 ` [RFC PATCH 1/8] virtio: add functions for piecewise addition of buffers Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 12:22 ` [RFC PATCH 2/8] virtio-blk: reorganize virtblk_add_req Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 12:22 ` [RFC PATCH 3/8] virtio-blk: use virtqueue_start_buf on bio path Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 12:22 ` [RFC PATCH 4/8] virtio-blk: use virtqueue_start_buf on req path Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 12:22 ` [RFC PATCH 5/8] scatterlist: introduce sg_unmark_end Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 12:35 ` Jens Axboe
2013-02-07 12:22 ` [RFC PATCH 6/8] virtio-net: unmark scatterlist ending after virtqueue_add_buf Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 12:22 ` [RFC PATCH 7/8] virtio-scsi: use virtqueue_start_buf Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 12:22 ` [RFC PATCH 8/8] virtio: reimplement virtqueue_add_buf using new functions Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 0/8] virtio: new API for addition of buffers, scatterlist changes Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-02-07 13:14 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 13:23 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-02-07 13:20 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-07 13:31 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2013-02-07 13:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-08 4:05 ` Rusty Russell
2013-02-08 6:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-02-08 11:52 ` Jens Axboe
2013-02-13 9:46 ` Rusty Russell
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=20130207133133.GC21707@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=asias@redhat.com \
--cc=gaowanlong@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).