Re: [PATCH 00/33] virtio-net: support AF_XDP zero copy

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 09:46:46AM +0100, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 03:37:32AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 11:33:31AM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
> > > On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 15:41:44 +0100, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2023-02-02 at 19:00 +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
> > > > > XDP socket(AF_XDP) is an excellent bypass kernel network framework. The zero
> > > > > copy feature of xsk (XDP socket) needs to be supported by the driver. The
> > > > > performance of zero copy is very good. mlx5 and intel ixgbe already support
> > > > > this feature, This patch set allows virtio-net to support xsk's zerocopy xmit
> > > > > feature.
> > > > >
> > > > > Virtio-net did not support per-queue reset, so it was impossible to support XDP
> > > > > Socket Zerocopy. At present, we have completed the work of Virtio Spec and
> > > > > Kernel in Per-Queue Reset. It is time for Virtio-Net to complete the support for
> > > > > the XDP Socket Zerocopy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Virtio-net can not increase the queue at will, so xsk shares the queue with
> > > > > kernel.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other hand, Virtio-Net does not support generate interrupt manually, so
> > > > > when we wakeup tx xmit, we used some tips. If the CPU run by TX NAPI last time
> > > > > is other CPUs, use IPI to wake up NAPI on the remote CPU. If it is also the
> > > > > local CPU, then we wake up sofrirqd.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the large effort.
> > > >
> > > > Since this will likely need a few iterations, on next revision please
> > > > do split the work in multiple chunks to help the reviewer efforts -
> > > > from Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst:
> > > >
> > > >  - don't post large series (> 15 patches), break them up
> > > >
> > > > In this case I guess you can split it in 1 (or even 2) pre-req series
> > > > and another one for the actual xsk zero copy support.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > OK.
> > > 
> > > I can split patch into multiple parts such as
> > > 
> > > * virtio core
> > > * xsk
> > > * virtio-net prepare
> > > * virtio-net support xsk zerocopy
> > > 
> > > However, there is a problem, the virtio core part should enter the VHOST branch
> > > of Michael. Then, should I post follow-up patches to which branch vhost or
> > > next-next?
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > 
> > I personally think 33 patches is still manageable no need to split.
> > Do try to be careful and track acks and changes: if someone sends an ack
> > add it in the patch if you change the patch drop the acks,
> > and logs this fact in the changelog in the cover letter
> > so people know they need to re-review.
> 
> To me some of the patches are too granular but probably this is related to
> personal taste.

I agree here. Some unrelated refactoring can also be deferred.

> However, I would like to ask to check how this series
> affects existing ZC enabled driver(s), since xsk core is touched.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Paolo
> > > >
> >