search for: be294a51a

...the vhost_has_work(), the work in the dev work_list may be >>> rx work, or tx work, right ? >> Yes. We can add a boolean to record whether or not we've called >> vhost_poll_queue() for rvq. And avoid calling vhost_net_enable_vq() if >> it was true. > so, the commit be294a51a "vhost_net: Avoid rx queue wake-ups during busypoll" > may not consider the case: work is tx work in the dev work list. So two kinds of work, tx kick or tx wakeup. For tx kick, we check vhost_vq_avail_empty() and avoid unnecessary kicks by not enabling kick if we found something is...

...the vhost_has_work(), the work in the dev work_list may be >>> rx work, or tx work, right ? >> Yes. We can add a boolean to record whether or not we've called >> vhost_poll_queue() for rvq. And avoid calling vhost_net_enable_vq() if >> it was true. > so, the commit be294a51a "vhost_net: Avoid rx queue wake-ups during busypoll" > may not consider the case: work is tx work in the dev work list. So two kinds of work, tx kick or tx wakeup. For tx kick, we check vhost_vq_avail_empty() and avoid unnecessary kicks by not enabling kick if we found something is...

...v work_list may be >>>>> rx work, or tx work, right ? >>>> Yes. We can add a boolean to record whether or not we've called >>>> vhost_poll_queue() for rvq. And avoid calling vhost_net_enable_vq() if >>>> it was true. >>> so, the commit be294a51a "vhost_net: Avoid rx queue wake-ups during busypoll" >>> may not consider the case: work is tx work in the dev work list. >> So two kinds of work, tx kick or tx wakeup. >> >> For tx kick, we check vhost_vq_avail_empty() and avoid unnecessary kicks >> by no...

...work in the dev work_list may be > >>> rx work, or tx work, right ? > >> Yes. We can add a boolean to record whether or not we've called > >> vhost_poll_queue() for rvq. And avoid calling vhost_net_enable_vq() if > >> it was true. > > so, the commit be294a51a "vhost_net: Avoid rx queue wake-ups during busypoll" > > may not consider the case: work is tx work in the dev work list. > > So two kinds of work, tx kick or tx wakeup. > > For tx kick, we check vhost_vq_avail_empty() and avoid unnecessary kicks > by not enabling kic...

..._has_work(), the work in the dev work_list may be >>> rx work, or tx work, right ? >> >> Yes. We can add a boolean to record whether or not we've called >> vhost_poll_queue() for rvq. And avoid calling vhost_net_enable_vq() if >> it was true. > so, the commit be294a51a "vhost_net: Avoid rx queue wake-ups during busypoll" > may not consider the case: work is tx work in the dev work list. Not sure what you are concerned but what I can say is that we need to poll rx work if vhost_has_work() detects tx work in vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len() since rx busyp...

..._has_work(), the work in the dev work_list may be >>> rx work, or tx work, right ? >> >> Yes. We can add a boolean to record whether or not we've called >> vhost_poll_queue() for rvq. And avoid calling vhost_net_enable_vq() if >> it was true. > so, the commit be294a51a "vhost_net: Avoid rx queue wake-ups during busypoll" > may not consider the case: work is tx work in the dev work list. Not sure what you are concerned but what I can say is that we need to poll rx work if vhost_has_work() detects tx work in vhost_net_rx_peek_head_len() since rx busyp...

On 2018?08?03? 10:51, Tonghao Zhang wrote: > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:23 PM Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 2018?08?02? 16:41, Toshiaki Makita wrote: >>> On 2018/08/02 17:18, Jason Wang wrote: >>>> On 2018?08?01? 17:52, Tonghao Zhang wrote: >>>>>> +static void vhost_net_busy_poll_check(struct vhost_net *net,

On 2018?08?03? 10:51, Tonghao Zhang wrote: > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:23 PM Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 2018?08?02? 16:41, Toshiaki Makita wrote: >>> On 2018/08/02 17:18, Jason Wang wrote: >>>> On 2018?08?01? 17:52, Tonghao Zhang wrote: >>>>>> +static void vhost_net_busy_poll_check(struct vhost_net *net,

...> If we use the vhost_has_work(), the work in the dev work_list may be > > rx work, or tx work, right ? > > Yes. We can add a boolean to record whether or not we've called > vhost_poll_queue() for rvq. And avoid calling vhost_net_enable_vq() if > it was true. so, the commit be294a51a "vhost_net: Avoid rx queue wake-ups during busypoll" may not consider the case: work is tx work in the dev work list. > So here's the needed changes: > > 1) Split the wakeup disabling to another patch > 2) Squash the vhost_net_busy_poll_try_queue() and > vhost_net_busy...

...ev work_list may be > >>> rx work, or tx work, right ? > >> > >> Yes. We can add a boolean to record whether or not we've called > >> vhost_poll_queue() for rvq. And avoid calling vhost_net_enable_vq() if > >> it was true. > > so, the commit be294a51a "vhost_net: Avoid rx queue wake-ups during busypoll" > > may not consider the case: work is tx work in the dev work list. > > Not sure what you are concerned but what I can say is that we need to > poll rx work if vhost_has_work() detects tx work in > vhost_net_rx_peek_h...