From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51916) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLvti-0004m7-GN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:41:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLvtd-0006D6-7U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:41:46 -0500 Received: from mx6-phx2.redhat.com ([209.132.183.39]:44861) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLvtd-0006Cp-0K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:41:41 -0500 Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:41:38 -0500 (EST) From: Pankaj Gupta Message-ID: <353871312.9426025.1423755698156.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <373579236.9177551.1423739188738.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <1423722005-6129-1-git-send-email-pagupta@redhat.com> <20150212102931.GA22283@redhat.com> <373579236.9177551.1423739188738.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] net: 'Remove vhostforce option in addition to vhost param' List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: jasowang@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, aliguori@amazon.com > > > 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 > > > > 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? I took the idea from KVM/Networking todo list. Do we have some other dependency before we want to remove vhostforce? > > > > > > --- > > > 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 > > > > >