From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Xi Wang <xii@google.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Maxim Krasnyansky <maxk@qti.qualcomm.com>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net-tun: restructure tun_do_read for better sleep/wakeup efficiency
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 14:03:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <537AF036.7010005@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1400562668.5367.96.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
On 05/20/2014 01:11 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 12:44 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 05/19/2014 10:09 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> About the sk_data_ready() and wake_up_all(), you missed the whole part
>>> of the patch I think.
>>>
>>> Check how sock_def_readable() does everything properly and efficiently,
>>> including the async part.
>> But this changes (sk_data_ready()) has nothing related to switching to
>> use __skb_recv_datagram()
>>
> This is totally related.
>
> I think you did not yet understood this patch
Sorry for being unclear, but I think you misunderstand my meaning.
>
> Compare wake_up_all() and sk_data_ready() speeds, you'll be surprised.
>
> You should ask to yourself : Why do we use wq_has_sleeper() in
> networking stacks ?
See my first reply, I don't have objection that uses sk_data_ready() in
tun_net_xmit(). My only concern is using sk_data_ready() in
tun_detach_all():
- It was only called during tun destroying, so I believe we don't care
about the performance in this condition.
- sk_data_ready() was usually called when there's something new to be
processed which is not case in tun_detach_all()
- Not sure it was a problem but sock_def_readable() will not wake up
uninterruptible task during tun destroying.
- If we make sock_fasync() works for tun in the future, it may send
SIGIO to user process during tun destroying which is not expected.
Thanks
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-20 6:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-16 22:11 [PATCH v2] net-tun: restructure tun_do_read for better sleep/wakeup efficiency Xi Wang
2014-05-19 9:27 ` Jason Wang
2014-05-19 14:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-05-20 4:44 ` Jason Wang
2014-05-20 4:52 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-05-20 6:35 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-05-20 5:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-05-20 6:03 ` Jason Wang [this message]
2014-05-20 6:34 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-05-20 6:55 ` Jason Wang
2014-05-20 13:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-05-21 4:45 ` Jason Wang
2014-05-19 16:06 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-05-20 4:51 ` Jason Wang
2014-05-20 6:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-05-20 6:40 ` Jason Wang
2014-05-21 7:54 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-05-21 19:51 ` David Miller
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=537AF036.7010005@redhat.com \
--to=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=maxk@qti.qualcomm.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xii@google.com \
/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).