From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
To: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] vsock/virtio: optimizations to increase the throughput
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:23:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190408092318.GM15001@stefanha-x1.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190405074917.ooftpalmploq6x3b@steredhat>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2211 bytes --]
On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 09:49:17AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 02:04:10PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 06:47:15PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 11:52:46AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > I simply love it that you have analysed the individual impact of
> > > > each patch! Great job!
> > >
> > > Thanks! I followed Stefan's suggestions!
> > >
> > > >
> > > > For comparison's sake, it could be IMHO benefitial to add a column
> > > > with virtio-net+vhost-net performance.
> > > >
> > > > This will both give us an idea about whether the vsock layer introduces
> > > > inefficiencies, and whether the virtio-net idea has merit.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sure, I already did TCP tests on virtio-net + vhost, starting qemu in
> > > this way:
> > > $ qemu-system-x86_64 ... \
> > > -netdev tap,id=net0,vhost=on,ifname=tap0,script=no,downscript=no \
> > > -device virtio-net-pci,netdev=net0
> > >
> > > I did also a test using TCP_NODELAY, just to be fair, because VSOCK
> > > doesn't implement something like this.
> >
> > Why not?
> >
>
> I think because originally VSOCK was designed to be simple and
> low-latency, but of course we can introduce something like that.
>
> Current implementation directly copy the buffer from the user-space in a
> virtio_vsock_pkt and enqueue it to be transmitted.
>
> Maybe we can introduce a buffer per socket where accumulate bytes and
> send it when it is full or when a timer is fired . We can also introduce
> a VSOCK_NODELAY (maybe using the same value of TCP_NODELAY for
> compatibility) to send the buffer immediately for low-latency use cases.
>
> What do you think?
Today virtio-vsock implements a 1:1 sendmsg():packet relationship
because it's simple. But there's no need for the guest to enqueue
multiple VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RW packets when a single large packet could
combine all payloads for a connection. This is not the same as
TCP_NODELAY but related.
I think it's worth exploring TCP_NODELAY and send_pkt_list merging.
Hopefully it won't make the code much more complicated.
Stefan
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-08 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-04 10:58 [PATCH RFC 0/4] vsock/virtio: optimizations to increase the throughput Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-04 10:58 ` [PATCH RFC 1/4] vsock/virtio: reduce credit update messages Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-04 19:15 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-05 8:16 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-08 9:25 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-04 10:58 ` [PATCH RFC 2/4] vhost/vsock: split packets to send using multiple buffers Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-05 8:13 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-05 9:36 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-08 9:28 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-04 10:58 ` [PATCH RFC 3/4] vsock/virtio: change the maximum packet size allowed Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-05 8:24 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-05 10:07 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-08 9:37 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-08 14:55 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-08 14:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-04-08 15:17 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-08 15:45 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-04 10:58 ` [PATCH RFC 4/4] vsock/virtio: increase RX buffer size to 64 KiB Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-05 8:44 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-08 6:35 ` Jason Wang
2019-04-04 14:14 ` [PATCH RFC 0/4] vsock/virtio: optimizations to increase the throughput Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-04 15:44 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-04 15:52 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-04-04 16:47 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-04 18:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-04-05 7:49 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-04-08 9:23 ` Stefan Hajnoczi [this message]
2019-04-08 6:43 ` Jason Wang
2019-04-08 9:44 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-04-09 8:36 ` Jason Wang
2019-04-09 9:13 ` Stefano Garzarella
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=20190408092318.GM15001@stefanha-x1.localdomain \
--to=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sgarzare@redhat.com \
--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