From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
aliguori@amazon.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] net: 'Remove vhostforce option in addition to vhost param'
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 15:45:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150219144506.GB5002@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1761175029.12847438.1424347363843.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 07:02:43AM -0500, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could you please help/guide me here. As suggested by Jason I did other changes also.
> But when I did testing still virtio-net.c functions like 'receive()' gets called when vhost is 'ON'.
>
> I want to know is there anything I am missing here or is this expected behaviour?
It's a known bug.
> I was also searching for "kvm eventfd support for injecting level-triggered interrupts", For non-MSIX
> guests, can we remove vhost-force unless we have this feature?
>
> Best regards,
> Pankaj
This feature is unused by vhost ATM.
> > From: "Jason Wang" <jasowang@redhat.com>
> > To: "Pankaj Gupta" <pagupta@redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, aliguori@amazon.com
> > Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2015 8:11:29 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] net: 'Remove vhostforce option in addition to vhost param'
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:50:05AM +0530, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> > >> > > vhostforce was added to enable use of vhost when
> > >> > > guest don't have MSI-X support.
> > >> > > Now, we have scenarios which dont use interrupts
> > >> > > like DPDK and still use vhost. Also, performance of
> > >> > > guests without MSI-X support is getting less popular.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Its ok to remove this extra option and enable vhost
> > >> > > on the basis of vhost=ON/OFF.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com>
> > >> >
> > >> > The patch doesn't seem to do what it says.
> > >> > Did you try with a non MSIX guest and vhost=on, to check that
> > >> > it actually runs vhost and not userspace virtio?
> > >>
> > >> No, I have not. I just did basic tested a new guest without
> > >> vhostforce.
> > >> I will test non-MSIX guest and share the result.
> > >
> > > I tested this with RHEL 4 guest which don't have MSI-X. Though vhost
> > > gets
> > > created but still userspace virtio-net code executes.
> > >
> > > So, vhostforce was added to disable vhost for non-MSI guest?
> >
> > In fact to enable vhost.
> > >
> > > I took the idea from KVM/Networking todo list.
> > >
> > > Do we have some other dependency before we want to remove vhostforce?
> > >
> >
> > You may want to take a look at the vhost_dev->force and
> > vhost_dev_query().
> > >
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > > ---
> > >> > > net/tap.c | 4 +---
> > >> > > net/vhost-user.c | 16 ++--------------
> > >> > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > >> > >
> > >> > > diff --git a/net/tap.c b/net/tap.c
> > >> > > index 1fe0edf..bd2efa9 100644
> > >> > > --- a/net/tap.c
> > >> > > +++ b/net/tap.c
> > >> > > @@ -634,13 +634,11 @@ static int net_init_tap_one(const
> > >> NetdevTapOptions
> > >> > > *tap, NetClientState *peer,
> > >> > > }
> > >> > > }
> > >> > >
> > >> > > - if (tap->has_vhost ? tap->vhost :
> > >> > > - vhostfdname || (tap->has_vhostforce &&
> > >> tap->vhostforce)) {
> > >> > > + if (tap->has_vhost ? tap->vhost : vhostfdname) {
> > >> > > VhostNetOptions options;
> > >> > >
> > >> > > options.backend_type = VHOST_BACKEND_TYPE_KERNEL;
> > >> > > options.net_backend = &s->nc;
> > >> > > - options.force = tap->has_vhostforce && tap->vhostforce;
> > >> > >
> > >> > > if (tap->has_vhostfd || tap->has_vhostfds) {
> > >> > > vhostfd = monitor_handle_fd_param(cur_mon,
> > >> vhostfdname);
> > >> > > diff --git a/net/vhost-user.c b/net/vhost-user.c
> > >> > > index 24e050c..d2d7bf2 100644
> > >> > > --- a/net/vhost-user.c
> > >> > > +++ b/net/vhost-user.c
> > >> > > @@ -18,7 +18,6 @@
> > >> > > typedef struct VhostUserState {
> > >> > > NetClientState nc;
> > >> > > CharDriverState *chr;
> > >> > > - bool vhostforce;
> > >> > > VHostNetState *vhost_net;
> > >> > > } VhostUserState;
> > >> > >
> > >> > > @@ -51,7 +50,6 @@ static int vhost_user_start(VhostUserState *s)
> > >> > > options.backend_type = VHOST_BACKEND_TYPE_USER;
> > >> > > options.net_backend = &s->nc;
> > >> > > options.opaque = s->chr;
> > >> > > - options.force = s->vhostforce;
> > >> > >
> > >> > > s->vhost_net = vhost_net_init(&options);
> > >> > >
> > >> > > @@ -133,8 +131,7 @@ static void net_vhost_user_event(void
> > >> *opaque, int
> > >> > > event)
> > >> > > }
> > >> > >
> > >> > > static int net_vhost_user_init(NetClientState *peer, const
> > >> char *device,
> > >> > > - const char *name,
> > >> CharDriverState *chr,
> > >> > > - bool vhostforce)
> > >> > > + const char *name,
> > >> CharDriverState *chr)
> > >> > > {
> > >> > > NetClientState *nc;
> > >> > > VhostUserState *s;
> > >> > > @@ -149,7 +146,6 @@ static int
> > >> net_vhost_user_init(NetClientState *peer,
> > >> > > const char *device,
> > >> > > /* We don't provide a receive callback */
> > >> > > s->nc.receive_disabled = 1;
> > >> > > s->chr = chr;
> > >> > > - s->vhostforce = vhostforce;
> > >> > >
> > >> > > qemu_chr_add_handlers(s->chr, NULL, NULL,
> > >> net_vhost_user_event, s);
> > >> > >
> > >> > > @@ -230,7 +226,6 @@ int net_init_vhost_user(const
> > >> NetClientOptions *opts,
> > >> > > const char *name,
> > >> > > {
> > >> > > const NetdevVhostUserOptions *vhost_user_opts;
> > >> > > CharDriverState *chr;
> > >> > > - bool vhostforce;
> > >> > >
> > >> > > assert(opts->kind == NET_CLIENT_OPTIONS_KIND_VHOST_USER);
> > >> > > vhost_user_opts = opts->vhost_user;
> > >> > > @@ -247,12 +242,5 @@ int net_init_vhost_user(const
> > >> NetClientOptions
> > >> > > *opts,
> > >> > > const char *name,
> > >> > > return -1;
> > >> > > }
> > >> > >
> > >> > > - /* vhostforce for non-MSIX */
> > >> > > - if (vhost_user_opts->has_vhostforce) {
> > >> > > - vhostforce = vhost_user_opts->vhostforce;
> > >> > > - } else {
> > >> > > - vhostforce = false;
> > >> > > - }
> > >> > > -
> > >> > > - return net_vhost_user_init(peer, "vhost_user", name, chr,
> > >> > > vhostforce);
> > >> > > + return net_vhost_user_init(peer, "vhost_user", name, chr);
> > >> > > }
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > 1.8.3.1
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-19 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-12 6:20 [Qemu-devel] [RFC] net: 'Remove vhostforce option in addition to vhost param' Pankaj Gupta
2015-02-12 10:29 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2015-02-12 11:06 ` Pankaj Gupta
2015-02-12 15:41 ` Pankaj Gupta
2015-02-15 2:41 ` Jason Wang
2015-02-19 12:02 ` Pankaj Gupta
2015-02-19 14:45 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
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=20150219144506.GB5002@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=aliguori@amazon.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=pagupta@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.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).