Re: [PATCH] virtiofsd: Used glib "shared" thread pool

["Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>]

* Vivek Goyal (vgoyal@redhat.com) wrote:
> glib offers thread pools and it seems to support "exclusive" and "shared"
> thread pools.
> 
> https://developer.gnome.org/glib/stable/glib-Thread-Pools.html#g-thread-pool-new
> 
> Currently we use "exlusive" thread pools but its performance seems to be
> poor. I tried using "shared" thread pools and performance seems much
> better. I posted performance results here.
> 
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/virtio-fs/2020-September/msg00080.html
> 
> So lets switch to shared thread pools. We can think of making it optional
> once somebody can show in what cases exclusive thread pools offer better
> results. For now, my simple performance tests across the board see
> better results with shared thread pools.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>

Queued (with Miklos's seccomp fix); although my gut feeling is we'll be
coming back to this again to understand how the threading should work.

Dave

> ---
>  tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> Index: qemu/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
> ===================================================================
> --- qemu.orig/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c	2020-09-21 17:28:27.444438015 -0400
> +++ qemu/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c	2020-09-21 17:28:30.584568910 -0400
> @@ -695,7 +695,7 @@ static void *fv_queue_thread(void *opaqu
>      struct fuse_session *se = qi->virtio_dev->se;
>      GThreadPool *pool;
>  
> -    pool = g_thread_pool_new(fv_queue_worker, qi, se->thread_pool_size, TRUE,
> +    pool = g_thread_pool_new(fv_queue_worker, qi, se->thread_pool_size, FALSE,
>                               NULL);
>      if (!pool) {
>          fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "%s: g_thread_pool_new failed\n", __func__);
-- 
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK