From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] converting the block layer from coroutines to threads
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:01:13 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F47FA99.8050608@codemonkey.ws> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F47F685.5010000@redhat.com>
On 02/24/2012 02:43 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 08:22 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Virtio really wants each virtqueue to be processed in a separate
>> thread. On a multicore system, there's considerable improvement doing
>> this. I think that's where we ought to start.
>
> Well, that's where we ought to *get*. Stefan's work is awesome but with
> the current feature set it would be hard to justify it upstream.
>
> To get it upstream we need to generalize it and make it work well with
> the block layer. And vice versa make the block layer work well with
> threads, which is what I care about here.
>
>> We really just need the block layer to be re-entrant, we don't
>> actually need qcow2 or anything else that uses coroutines to use full
>> threads.
>
> Once you can issue I/O from two threads at the same-time (such as
> streaming in the iothread and guest I/O in the virtqueue thread),
> everything already needs to be thread-safe. It is a pretty short step
> from there to thread pools for everything.
If you start with a thread safe API for submitting block requests, that could be
implemented as
bapi_aiocb *bapi_submit_readv(bapi_driver *d, struct iovec *iov, int iovcnt,
off_t offset)
{
bapi_request *req = make_bapi_request(BAPI_READ, iov, iovcnt, offset);
return bapi_queue_add_req(req);
}
Which would schedule the I/O thread to actually implement the operation. You
could then start incrementally refactoring specific drivers to be re-entrant
(like linux-aio). But anything that already needs to use a thread pool to do
its I/O probably wouldn't benefit from threading virtio.
More importantly, the above would give you good performance to start with,
instead of refactoring a bunch of code hoping to eventually get to good performance.
>
>> Or at least, as far as I know, we don't have any performance data to
>> suggest that we do.
>
> No, it's not about speed, though of course it only works if there is no
> performance dip. It is just an enabling step.
>
> That said, my weekend officially begins now. :)
Enjoy!!
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
>
> Paolo
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-24 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-24 19:02 [Qemu-devel] converting the block layer from coroutines to threads Paolo Bonzini
2012-02-24 19:22 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-02-24 20:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-02-24 21:01 ` Anthony Liguori [this message]
2012-02-28 9:34 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=4F47FA99.8050608@codemonkey.ws \
--to=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.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).