From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sasha Levin Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-ring: Use threshold for switching to indirect descriptors Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 14:13:51 +0200 Message-ID: <1323000831.4205.4.camel@lappy> References: <20111129125622.GB19157@redhat.com> <1322573688.4395.11.camel@lappy> <20111129135406.GB30966@redhat.com> <1322576464.7003.6.camel@lappy> <20111129145451.GD30966@redhat.com> <4ED4F30F.8000603@redhat.com> <1322669511.3985.8.camel@lappy> <87wrahrp0u.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20111201075847.GA5479@redhat.com> <1322726977.3259.3.camel@lappy> <20111201102640.GB8822@redhat.com> <87zkfbre9x.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <1322913028.3782.4.camel@lappy> <4EDB5EF0.2010909@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4EDB5EF0.2010909@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Avi Kivity Cc: markmc@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Sun, 2011-12-04 at 13:52 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 12/03/2011 01:50 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 11:16 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 12:26:42 +0200, "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 10:09:37AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 09:58 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > > We'll presumably need some logic to increment is back, > > > > > > to account for random workload changes. > > > > > > Something like slow start? > > > > > > > > > > We can increment it each time the queue was less than 10% full, it > > > > > should act like slow start, no? > > > > > > > > No, we really shouldn't get an empty ring as long as things behave > > > > well. What I meant is something like: > > > > > > I was thinking of the network output case, but you're right. We need to > > > distinguish between usually full (eg. virtio-net input) and usually > > > empty (eg. virtio-net output). > > > > > > The signal for "we to pack more into the ring" is different. We could > > > use some hacky heuristic like "out == 0" but I'd rather make it explicit > > > when we set up the virtqueue. > > > > > > Our other alternative, moving the logic to the driver, is worse. > > > > > > As to fading the effect over time, that's harder. We have to deplete > > > the ring quite a few times before it turns into always-indirect. We > > > could back off every time the ring is totally idle, but that may hurt > > > bursty traffic. Let's try simple first? > > > > I tried to take a different approach, and tried putting the indirect > > descriptors in a kmem_cache as Michael suggested. The benchmarks showed > > that this way virtio-net actually worked faster with indirect on even in > > a single stream. > > How much better? host->guest was same with both indirect on and off, and guest->host went up by 5% with indirect on. This was just a simple 1 TCP stream test. > > I think that if indirects benefit networking, then we're doing something > wrong. What's going on? Does the ring get filled too early? If so we > should expand it. > -- Sasha.