Re: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] virtio: abstract virtqueue related methods

Michael S. Tsirkin
2023-05-17T03:58:03Z

On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 11:51:03AM +0800, zhenwei pi wrote:
>
>
> On 5/17/23 11:46, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 10:54:22AM +0800, zhenwei pi wrote:
> > > v1 -> v2:
> > > - Suggested by MST, use fast path for vring based performance
> > > sensitive API.
> > > - Reduce changes in tools/virtio.
> > >
> > > Add test result(no obvious change):
> > > Before:
> > > time ./vringh_test --parallel
> > > Using CPUS 0 and 191
> > > Guest: notified 10036893, pinged 68278
> > > Host: notified 68278, pinged 3093532
> > >
> > > real 0m14.463s
> > > user 0m6.437s
> > > sys 0m8.010s
> > >
> > > After:
> > > time ./vringh_test --parallel
> > > Using CPUS 0 and 191
> > > Guest: notified 10036709, pinged 68347
> > > Host: notified 68347, pinged 3085292
> > >
> > > real 0m14.196s
> > > user 0m6.289s
> > > sys 0m7.885s
> > >
> > > v1:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > 3 weeks ago, I posted a proposal 'Virtio Over Fabrics':
> > > https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/202304/msg00442.html
> > >
> > > Jason and Stefan pointed out that a non-vring based virtqueue has a
> > > chance to overwrite virtqueue instead of using vring virtqueue.
> > >
> > > Then I try to abstract virtqueue related methods in this series, the
> > > details changes see the comment of patch 'virtio: abstract virtqueue related methods'.
> > >
> > > Something is still remained:
> > > - __virtqueue_break/__virtqueue_unbreak is supposed to use by internal
> > > virtio core, I'd like to rename them to vring_virtqueue_break
> > > /vring_virtqueue_unbreak. Is this reasonable?
> >
> > Why? These just set a flag?
> >
>
> Rename '__virtqueue_break' to 'vring_virtqueue_break', to make symbols
> exported from virtio_ring.ko have unified prefix 'vring_virtqueue_xxx'.

I just do not see why you need these callbacks at all.

> > > - virtqueue_get_desc_addr/virtqueue_get_avail_addr/virtqueue_get_used_addr
> > > /virtqueue_get_vring is vring specific, I'd like to rename them like
> > > vring_virtqueue_get_desc_addr. Is this reasonable?
> > > - there are still some functions in virtio_ring.c with prefix *virtqueue*,
> > > for example 'virtqueue_add_split', just keep it or rename it to
> > > 'vring_virtqueue_add_split'?
> > > zhenwei pi (2):
> > > virtio: abstract virtqueue related methods
> > > tools/virtio: implement virtqueue in test
> > >
> > > drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 285 +++++-----------------
> > > include/linux/virtio.h | 441 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > > include/linux/virtio_ring.h | 26 +++
> > > tools/virtio/linux/virtio.h | 355 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > 4 files changed, 807 insertions(+), 300 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.20.1
> >
>
> --
> zhenwei pi