Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-Mar-22 14:16 UTC
[PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:04:46PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:> We used to dequeue one skb during recvmsg() from skb_array, this could > be inefficient because of the bad cache utilization and spinlock > touching for each packet. This patch tries to batch them by calling > batch dequeuing helpers explicitly on the exported skb array and pass > the skb back through msg_control for underlayer socket to finish the > userspace copying. > > Tests were done by XDP1: > - small buffer: > Before: 1.88Mpps > After : 2.25Mpps (+19.6%) > - mergeable buffer: > Before: 1.83Mpps > After : 2.10Mpps (+14.7%) > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> > --- > drivers/vhost/net.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c > index 9b51989..53f09f2 100644 > --- a/drivers/vhost/net.c > +++ b/drivers/vhost/net.c > @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ > #include <linux/if_macvlan.h> > #include <linux/if_tap.h> > #include <linux/if_vlan.h> > +#include <linux/skb_array.h> > +#include <linux/skbuff.h> > > #include <net/sock.h> > > @@ -85,6 +87,7 @@ struct vhost_net_ubuf_ref { > struct vhost_virtqueue *vq; > }; > > +#define VHOST_RX_BATCH 64 > struct vhost_net_virtqueue { > struct vhost_virtqueue vq; > size_t vhost_hlen; > @@ -99,6 +102,10 @@ struct vhost_net_virtqueue { > /* Reference counting for outstanding ubufs. > * Protected by vq mutex. Writers must also take device mutex. */ > struct vhost_net_ubuf_ref *ubufs; > + struct skb_array *rx_array; > + void *rxq[VHOST_RX_BATCH]; > + int rt; > + int rh; > }; > > struct vhost_net { > @@ -201,6 +208,8 @@ static void vhost_net_vq_reset(struct vhost_net *n) > n->vqs[i].ubufs = NULL; > n->vqs[i].vhost_hlen = 0; > n->vqs[i].sock_hlen = 0; > + n->vqs[i].rt = 0; > + n->vqs[i].rh = 0; > } > > } > @@ -503,13 +512,30 @@ static void handle_tx(struct vhost_net *net) > mutex_unlock(&vq->mutex); > } > > -static int peek_head_len(struct sock *sk) > +static int peek_head_len_batched(struct vhost_net_virtqueue *rvq)Pls rename to say what it actually does: fetch skbs> +{ > + if (rvq->rh != rvq->rt) > + goto out; > + > + rvq->rh = rvq->rt = 0; > + rvq->rt = skb_array_consume_batched_bh(rvq->rx_array, rvq->rxq, > + VHOST_RX_BATCH);A comment explaining why is is -bh would be helpful.> + if (!rvq->rt) > + return 0; > +out: > + return __skb_array_len_with_tag(rvq->rxq[rvq->rh]); > +} > + > +static int peek_head_len(struct vhost_net_virtqueue *rvq, struct sock *sk) > { > struct socket *sock = sk->sk_socket; > struct sk_buff *head; > int len = 0; > unsigned long flags; > > + if (rvq->rx_array) > + return peek_head_len_batched(rvq); > + > if (sock->ops->peek_len) > return sock->ops->peek_len(sock); > > @@ -535,12 +561,14 @@ static int sk_has_rx_data(struct sock *sk) > return skb_queue_empty(&sk->sk_receive_queue); > } > > -static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk) > +static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, > + struct sock *sk) > { > + struct vhost_net_virtqueue *rvq = &net->vqs[VHOST_NET_VQ_RX]; > struct vhost_net_virtqueue *nvq = &net->vqs[VHOST_NET_VQ_TX]; > struct vhost_virtqueue *vq = &nvq->vq; > unsigned long uninitialized_var(endtime); > - int len = peek_head_len(sk); > + int len = peek_head_len(rvq, sk); > > if (!len && vq->busyloop_timeout) { > /* Both tx vq and rx socket were polled here */ > @@ -561,7 +589,7 @@ static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk) > vhost_poll_queue(&vq->poll); > mutex_unlock(&vq->mutex); > > - len = peek_head_len(sk); > + len = peek_head_len(rvq, sk); > } > > return len; > @@ -699,6 +727,8 @@ static void handle_rx(struct vhost_net *net) > /* On error, stop handling until the next kick. */ > if (unlikely(headcount < 0)) > goto out; > + if (nvq->rx_array) > + msg.msg_control = nvq->rxq[nvq->rh++]; > /* On overrun, truncate and discard */ > if (unlikely(headcount > UIO_MAXIOV)) { > iov_iter_init(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vq->iov, 1, 1); > @@ -841,6 +871,8 @@ static int vhost_net_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *f) > n->vqs[i].done_idx = 0; > n->vqs[i].vhost_hlen = 0; > n->vqs[i].sock_hlen = 0; > + n->vqs[i].rt = 0; > + n->vqs[i].rh = 0; > } > vhost_dev_init(dev, vqs, VHOST_NET_VQ_MAX); > > @@ -856,11 +888,15 @@ static struct socket *vhost_net_stop_vq(struct vhost_net *n, > struct vhost_virtqueue *vq) > { > struct socket *sock; > + struct vhost_net_virtqueue *nvq > + container_of(vq, struct vhost_net_virtqueue, vq); > > mutex_lock(&vq->mutex); > sock = vq->private_data; > vhost_net_disable_vq(n, vq); > vq->private_data = NULL; > + while (nvq->rh != nvq->rt) > + kfree_skb(nvq->rxq[nvq->rh++]); > mutex_unlock(&vq->mutex); > return sock; > } > @@ -953,6 +989,25 @@ static struct socket *get_raw_socket(int fd) > return ERR_PTR(r); > } > > +static struct skb_array *get_tap_skb_array(int fd) > +{ > + struct skb_array *array; > + struct file *file = fget(fd); > + > + if (!file) > + return NULL; > + array = tun_get_skb_array(file); > + if (!IS_ERR(array)) > + goto out; > + array = tap_get_skb_array(file); > + if (!IS_ERR(array)) > + goto out; > + array = NULL; > +out: > + fput(file); > + return array; > +} > + > static struct socket *get_tap_socket(int fd) > { > struct file *file = fget(fd); > @@ -1029,6 +1084,7 @@ static long vhost_net_set_backend(struct vhost_net *n, unsigned index, int fd) > > vhost_net_disable_vq(n, vq); > vq->private_data = sock; > + nvq->rx_array = get_tap_skb_array(fd); > r = vhost_vq_init_access(vq); > if (r) > goto err_used; > -- > 2.7.4
Jason Wang
2017-Mar-23 05:34 UTC
[PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array
On 2017?03?22? 22:16, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:04:46PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> We used to dequeue one skb during recvmsg() from skb_array, this could >> be inefficient because of the bad cache utilization and spinlock >> touching for each packet. This patch tries to batch them by calling >> batch dequeuing helpers explicitly on the exported skb array and pass >> the skb back through msg_control for underlayer socket to finish the >> userspace copying. >> >> Tests were done by XDP1: >> - small buffer: >> Before: 1.88Mpps >> After : 2.25Mpps (+19.6%) >> - mergeable buffer: >> Before: 1.83Mpps >> After : 2.10Mpps (+14.7%) >> >> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> >> --- >> drivers/vhost/net.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c >> index 9b51989..53f09f2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/vhost/net.c >> +++ b/drivers/vhost/net.c >> @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ >> #include <linux/if_macvlan.h> >> #include <linux/if_tap.h> >> #include <linux/if_vlan.h> >> +#include <linux/skb_array.h> >> +#include <linux/skbuff.h> >> >> #include <net/sock.h> >> >> @@ -85,6 +87,7 @@ struct vhost_net_ubuf_ref { >> struct vhost_virtqueue *vq; >> }; >> >> +#define VHOST_RX_BATCH 64 >> struct vhost_net_virtqueue { >> struct vhost_virtqueue vq; >> size_t vhost_hlen; >> @@ -99,6 +102,10 @@ struct vhost_net_virtqueue { >> /* Reference counting for outstanding ubufs. >> * Protected by vq mutex. Writers must also take device mutex. */ >> struct vhost_net_ubuf_ref *ubufs; >> + struct skb_array *rx_array; >> + void *rxq[VHOST_RX_BATCH]; >> + int rt; >> + int rh; >> }; >> >> struct vhost_net { >> @@ -201,6 +208,8 @@ static void vhost_net_vq_reset(struct vhost_net *n) >> n->vqs[i].ubufs = NULL; >> n->vqs[i].vhost_hlen = 0; >> n->vqs[i].sock_hlen = 0; >> + n->vqs[i].rt = 0; >> + n->vqs[i].rh = 0; >> } >> >> } >> @@ -503,13 +512,30 @@ static void handle_tx(struct vhost_net *net) >> mutex_unlock(&vq->mutex); >> } >> >> -static int peek_head_len(struct sock *sk) >> +static int peek_head_len_batched(struct vhost_net_virtqueue *rvq) > Pls rename to say what it actually does: fetch skbsOk.> >> +{ >> + if (rvq->rh != rvq->rt) >> + goto out; >> + >> + rvq->rh = rvq->rt = 0; >> + rvq->rt = skb_array_consume_batched_bh(rvq->rx_array, rvq->rxq, >> + VHOST_RX_BATCH); > A comment explaining why is is -bh would be helpful.Ok. Thanks
Jason Wang
2017-Mar-29 09:58 UTC
[PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array
On 2017?03?23? 13:34, Jason Wang wrote:> > >> >>> +{ >>> + if (rvq->rh != rvq->rt) >>> + goto out; >>> + >>> + rvq->rh = rvq->rt = 0; >>> + rvq->rt = skb_array_consume_batched_bh(rvq->rx_array, rvq->rxq, >>> + VHOST_RX_BATCH); >> A comment explaining why is is -bh would be helpful. > > Ok. > > ThanksRethink about this. It looks like -bh is not needed in this case since no consumer run in bh. Thanks
Maybe Matching Threads
- [PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array
- [PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array
- [PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array
- [PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array
- [PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array