Re: [PATCH v8 4/8] vhost: Introduce vhost_worker_ops in vhost_worker

[Mike Christie <michael.christie@oracle.com>]

On 4/8/25 4:45 AM, Cindy Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 12:06 AM Mike Christie
> <michael.christie@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/7/25 3:17 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 06:02:48PM +0800, Cindy Lu wrote:
>>>> Abstract vhost worker operations (create/stop/wakeup) into an ops
>>>> structure to prepare for kthread mode support.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com>
>>>
>>> I worry about the overhead of indirect calls here.
>>>
>>> We have the wrappers, and only two options,
>>> why did you decide to add it like this,
>>> with ops?
>>>
>> That was from my review comment. Originally, I thought we
>> could share more code. For example I thought
>> vhost_run_work_kthread_list from patch 2 in this thread and
>> kernel/vhost_task.c:vhost_task_fn could be merged.
>>
> Hi Mike
> I guess you mean function vhost_run_work_list and vhost_run_work_kthread_list?
> sure, I will try to merge these two functions in next version

Oh no, I meant the opposite. I don't think it will work out
like how I thought it would originally.

I think Michael's concern about the extra indirect pointer
access in the IO path may cause issues with net. For scsi I
didn't see any issue but that's probably because we have
other perf issues.

So if Michael is saying to not do the ops then that's fine
with me.