[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCHv2 RFC 0/4] virtio and vhost-net capacity handling



On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 20:17:21 +0300, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 06:42:35PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > OK, here's a new attempt to use the new capacity api.  I also added more
> > comments to clarify the logic.  Hope this is more readable.  Let me know
> > pls.
> > 
> > This is on top of the patches applied by Rusty.
> > 
> > Warning: untested. Posting now to give people chance to
> > comment on the API.
> > 
> > Changes from v1:
> > - fix comment in patch 2 to correct confusion noted by Rusty
> > - rewrite patch 3 along the lines suggested by Rusty
> >   note: it's not exactly the same but I hope it's close
> >   enough, the main difference is that mine does limited
> >   polling even in the unlikely xmit failure case.
> > - added a patch to not return capacity from add_buf
> >   it always looked like a weird hack
> > 
> > Michael S. Tsirkin (4):
> >   virtio_ring: add capacity check API
> >   virtio_net: fix tx capacity checks using new API
> >   virtio_net: limit xmit polling
> >   Revert "virtio: make add_buf return capacity remaining:
> > 
> >  drivers/net/virtio_net.c     |  111 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> >  drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c |   10 +++-
> >  include/linux/virtio.h       |    7 ++-
> >  3 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
> > 
> > -- 
> > 1.7.5.53.gc233e
> 
> 
> And just FYI, here's a patch (on top) that I considered but
> decided against. This does a single get_buf before
> xmit. I thought it's not really needed as the capacity
> check in add_buf is relatively cheap, and we removed
> the kick in xmit_skb. But the point is that the loop
> will now be easy to move around if someone manages
> to show this benefits speed (which I doubt).

Agreed.  The other is clearer.

I like the approach these patches take.  Testing is required, but I
think the final result is a neater driver than the current one, as well
as having nicer latency.

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Linux Media]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]


Add to Google Powered by Linux