From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vhost_net: stop polling socket during rx processing
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 14:28:38 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160427141317-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461656153-24074-1-git-send-email-jasowang@redhat.com>
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 03:35:53AM -0400, Jason Wang wrote:
> We don't stop polling socket during rx processing, this will lead
> unnecessary wakeups from under layer net devices (E.g
> sock_def_readable() form tun). Rx will be slowed down in this
> way. This patch avoids this by stop polling socket during rx
> processing. A small drawback is that this introduces some overheads in
> light load case because of the extra start/stop polling, but single
> netperf TCP_RR does not notice any change. In a super heavy load case,
> e.g using pktgen to inject packet to guest, we get about ~17%
> improvement on pps:
>
> before: ~1370000 pkt/s
> after: ~1500000 pkt/s
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
There is one other possible enhancement: we actually have the wait queue
lock taken in _wake_up, but we give it up only to take it again in the
handler.
It would be nicer to just remove the entry when we wake
the vhost thread. Re-add it if required.
I think that something like the below would give you the necessary API.
Pls feel free to use it if you are going to implement a patch on top
doing this - that's not a reason not to include this simple patch
though.
--->
wait: add API to drop a wait_queue_t entry from wake up handler
A wake up handler might want to remove its own wait queue entry to avoid
future wakeups. In particular, vhost has such a need. As wait queue
lock is already taken, all we need is an API to remove the entry without
wait_queue_head_t which isn't currently accessible to wake up handlers.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
---
diff --git a/include/linux/wait.h b/include/linux/wait.h
index 27d7a0a..9c6604b 100644
--- a/include/linux/wait.h
+++ b/include/linux/wait.h
@@ -191,11 +191,17 @@ __add_wait_queue_tail_exclusive(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t *wait)
}
static inline void
-__remove_wait_queue(wait_queue_head_t *head, wait_queue_t *old)
+__remove_wait_queue_entry(wait_queue_t *old)
{
list_del(&old->task_list);
}
+static inline void
+__remove_wait_queue(wait_queue_head_t *head, wait_queue_t *old)
+{
+ __remove_wait_queue_entry(old);
+}
+
typedef int wait_bit_action_f(struct wait_bit_key *, int mode);
void __wake_up(wait_queue_head_t *q, unsigned int mode, int nr, void *key);
void __wake_up_locked_key(wait_queue_head_t *q, unsigned int mode, void *key);
next parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-27 11:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1461656153-24074-1-git-send-email-jasowang@redhat.com>
2016-04-27 11:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2016-04-28 6:19 ` [PATCH] vhost_net: stop polling socket during rx processing Jason Wang
2016-05-03 2:52 ` Jason Wang
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=20160427141317-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/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).