search for: 770,41

...(sock->ops->peek_len) > - return sock->ops->peek_len(sock); > - > - return skb_queue_empty(&sk->sk_receive_queue); > -} > - > static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, > bool *busyloop_intr) > { > @@ -770,41 +849,13 @@ static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, > struct vhost_net_virtqueue *tnvq = &net->vqs[VHOST_NET_VQ_TX]; > struct vhost_virtqueue *rvq = &rnvq->vq; > struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq = &tnvq->vq; > - unsigned l...

...(sock->ops->peek_len) > - return sock->ops->peek_len(sock); > - > - return skb_queue_empty(&sk->sk_receive_queue); > -} > - > static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, > bool *busyloop_intr) > { > @@ -770,41 +849,13 @@ static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, > struct vhost_net_virtqueue *tnvq = &net->vqs[VHOST_NET_VQ_TX]; > struct vhost_virtqueue *rvq = &rnvq->vq; > struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq = &tnvq->vq; > - unsigned l...

...(sock); > > - > > - return skb_queue_empty(&sk->sk_receive_queue); > > -} > > - > > static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, > > bool *busyloop_intr) > > { > > @@ -770,41 +829,13 @@ static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, > > struct vhost_net_virtqueue *tnvq = &net->vqs[VHOST_NET_VQ_TX]; > > struct vhost_virtqueue *rvq = &rnvq->vq; > > struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq = &tnvq-&...

...struct socket *sock = sk->sk_socket; - - if (sock->ops->peek_len) - return sock->ops->peek_len(sock); - - return skb_queue_empty(&sk->sk_receive_queue); -} - static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, bool *busyloop_intr) { @@ -770,41 +849,13 @@ static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, struct vhost_net_virtqueue *tnvq = &net->vqs[VHOST_NET_VQ_TX]; struct vhost_virtqueue *rvq = &rnvq->vq; struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq = &tnvq->vq; - unsigned long uninitialized_var(e...

From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> This patches improve the guest receive performance. On the handle_tx side, we poll the sock receive queue at the same time. handle_rx do that in the same way. For more performance report, see patch 4. v6->v7: fix issue and rebase codes: 1. on tx, busypoll will vhost_net_disable/enable_vq rx vq. [This is suggested by Toshiaki Makita

...(sock); > > - > > - return skb_queue_empty(&sk->sk_receive_queue); > > -} > > - > > static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, > > bool *busyloop_intr) > > { > > @@ -770,41 +849,13 @@ static int vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len(struct vhost_net *net, struct sock *sk, > > struct vhost_net_virtqueue *tnvq = &net->vqs[VHOST_NET_VQ_TX]; > > struct vhost_virtqueue *rvq = &rnvq->vq; > > struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq = &tnvq-&...

From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> This patches improve the guest receive performance. On the handle_tx side, we poll the sock receive queue at the same time. handle_rx do that in the same way. For more performance report, see patch 4, 5, 6 Tonghao Zhang (6): net: vhost: lock the vqs one by one net: vhost: replace magic number of lock annotation net: vhost: factor out

From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> This patches improve the guest receive performance. On the handle_tx side, we poll the sock receive queue at the same time. handle_rx do that in the same way. For more performance report, see patch 4, 5, 6 Tonghao Zhang (6): net: vhost: lock the vqs one by one net: vhost: replace magic number of lock annotation net: vhost: factor out