search for: tun_rx_batched

On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 04:09:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > +static int tun_rx_batched(struct tun_file *tfile, struct sk_buff *skb, > + int more) > +{ > + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; > + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; > + int qlen; > + bool rcv = false; > + > + spin_lock(&queue->lock); Should this be spin_lock...

On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 04:09:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > +static int tun_rx_batched(struct tun_file *tfile, struct sk_buff *skb, > + int more) > +{ > + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; > + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; > + int qlen; > + bool rcv = false; > + > + spin_lock(&queue->lock); Should this be spin_lock...

...> > rxhash = skb_get_hash(skb); > + > #ifndef CONFIG_4KSTACKS > - local_bh_disable(); > - netif_receive_skb(skb); > - local_bh_enable(); > + if (!rx_batched) { > + local_bh_disable(); > + netif_receive_skb(skb); > + local_bh_enable(); > + } else { > + tun_rx_batched(tfile, skb, more); > + } > #else > netif_rx_ni(skb); > #endif If rx_batched has been set, and we are talking to clients not using this new MSG_MORE facility (or such clients don't have multiple TX packets to send to you, thus MSG_MORE is often clear), you are doing a lot more w...

...> > rxhash = skb_get_hash(skb); > + > #ifndef CONFIG_4KSTACKS > - local_bh_disable(); > - netif_receive_skb(skb); > - local_bh_enable(); > + if (!rx_batched) { > + local_bh_disable(); > + netif_receive_skb(skb); > + local_bh_enable(); > + } else { > + tun_rx_batched(tfile, skb, more); > + } > #else > netif_rx_ni(skb); > #endif If rx_batched has been set, and we are talking to clients not using this new MSG_MORE facility (or such clients don't have multiple TX packets to send to you, thus MSG_MORE is often clear), you are doing a lot more w...

...b_array_consume(&tfile->tx_array)) != NULL) kfree_skb(skb); + skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_write_queue); skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_error_queue); } @@ -1140,10 +1145,36 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_alloc_skb(struct tun_file *tfile, return skb; } +static void tun_rx_batched(struct tun_file *tfile, struct sk_buff *skb, + int more) +{ + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; + int qlen; + bool rcv = false; + + spin_lock(&queue->lock); + qlen = skb_queue_len(queue); + __skb_queue_tail(queue, skb); +...

...kb_array_consume(&tfile->tx_array)) != NULL) kfree_skb(skb); + skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_write_queue); skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_error_queue); } @@ -1140,10 +1145,44 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_alloc_skb(struct tun_file *tfile, return skb; } +static int tun_rx_batched(struct tun_file *tfile, struct sk_buff *skb, + int more) +{ + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; + int qlen; + bool rcv = false; + + spin_lock(&queue->lock); + qlen = skb_queue_len(queue); + if (qlen > rx_batched) + got...

Hi: This series tries to implement tx batching support for vhost. This was done by using MSG_MORE as a hint for under layer socket. The backend (e.g tap) can then batch the packets temporarily in a list and submit it all once the number of bacthed exceeds a limitation. Tests shows obvious improvement on guest pktgen over over mlx4(noqueue) on host: Mpps -+%

Hi: This series tries to implement tx batching support for vhost. This was done by using MSG_MORE as a hint for under layer socket. The backend (e.g tap) can then batch the packets temporarily in a list and submit it all once the number of bacthed exceeds a limitation. Tests shows obvious improvement on guest pktgen over over mlx4(noqueue) on host: Mpps -+%

...b_array_consume(&tfile->tx_array)) != NULL) kfree_skb(skb); + skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_write_queue); skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_error_queue); } @@ -1139,10 +1141,46 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_alloc_skb(struct tun_file *tfile, return skb; } +static void tun_rx_batched(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, + struct sk_buff *skb, int more) +{ + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; + u32 rx_batched = tun->rx_batched; + bool rcv = false; + + if (!rx_batched || (!more && skb_queu...

...b_array_consume(&tfile->tx_array)) != NULL) kfree_skb(skb); + skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_write_queue); skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_error_queue); } @@ -1140,10 +1142,45 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_alloc_skb(struct tun_file *tfile, return skb; } +static void tun_rx_batched(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, + struct sk_buff *skb, int more) +{ + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; + u32 rx_batched = tun->rx_batched; + bool rcv = false; + + if (!rx_batched || (!more && skb_queu...

Hi: This series tries to implement tx batching support for vhost. This was done by using MSG_MORE as a hint for under layer socket. The backend (e.g tap) can then batch the packets temporarily in a list and submit it all once the number of bacthed exceeds a limitation. Tests shows obvious improvement on guest pktgen over over mlx4(noqueue) on host: Mpps -+%

Hi: This series tries to implement tx batching support for vhost. This was done by using MSG_MORE as a hint for under layer socket. The backend (e.g tap) can then batch the packets temporarily in a list and submit it all once the number of bacthed exceeds a limitation. Tests shows obvious improvement on guest pktgen over over mlx4(noqueue) on host: Mpps -+%

Hi: This series tries to implement tx batching support for vhost. This was done by using MSG_MORE as a hint for under layer socket. The backend (e.g tap) can then batch the packets temporarily in a list and submit it all once the number of bacthed exceeds a limitation. Tests shows obvious improvement on guest pktgen over over mlx4(noqueue) on host: Mpps -+%

Hi: This series tries to implement tx batching support for vhost. This was done by using MSG_MORE as a hint for under layer socket. The backend (e.g tap) can then batch the packets temporarily in a list and submit it all once the number of bacthed exceeds a limitation. Tests shows obvious improvement on guest pktgen over over mlx4(noqueue) on host: Mpps -+%

Hi: This series tries to implement tx batching support for vhost. This was done by using MSG_MORE as a hint for under layer socket. The backend (e.g tap) can then batch the packets temporarily in a list and submit it all once the number of bacthed exceeds a limitation. Tests shows obvious improvement on guest pktgen over over mlx4(noqueue) on host: Mpps -+%

Hi: This series tries to implement tx batching support for vhost. This was done by using MSG_MORE as a hint for under layer socket. The backend (e.g tap) can then batch the packets temporarily in a list and submit it all once the number of bacthed exceeds a limitation. Tests shows obvious improvement on guest pktgen over over mlx4(noqueue) on host: Mpps -+%

...kfree_skb(skb); > > + skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_write_queue); > skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_error_queue); > } > > @@ -1140,10 +1142,45 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_alloc_skb(struct tun_file *tfile, > return skb; > } > > +static void tun_rx_batched(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, > + struct sk_buff *skb, int more) > +{ > + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; > + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; > + u32 rx_batched = tun->rx_batched; > + bool rcv = false; > + > + if (!...

...kfree_skb(skb); > > + skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_write_queue); > skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_error_queue); > } > > @@ -1140,10 +1142,45 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_alloc_skb(struct tun_file *tfile, > return skb; > } > > +static void tun_rx_batched(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, > + struct sk_buff *skb, int more) > +{ > + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; > + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; > + u32 rx_batched = tun->rx_batched; > + bool rcv = false; > + > + if (!...

On 2017?01?03? 21:33, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 04:09:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> +static int tun_rx_batched(struct tun_file *tfile, struct sk_buff *skb, >> + int more) >> +{ >> + struct sk_buff_head *queue = &tfile->sk.sk_write_queue; >> + struct sk_buff_head process_queue; >> + int qlen; >> + bool rcv = false; >> + >> + spin_lock(&queue->...