search for: vhost_transport_send_pkt_work

...the guest. 2. When the host send packets, it help us to increase the parallelism (especially if the guest has 64 KB RX buffers) because the user thread will split packets, calling multiple times transport->stream_enqueue() in net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c:vsock_stream_sendmsg() while the vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() send them to the guest. Do you think make sense? Thanks, Stefano

...the guest. 2. When the host send packets, it help us to increase the parallelism (especially if the guest has 64 KB RX buffers) because the user thread will split packets, calling multiple times transport->stream_enqueue() in net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c:vsock_stream_sendmsg() while the vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() send them to the guest. Do you think make sense? Thanks, Stefano

...the host send packets, it help us to increase the parallelism > (especially if the guest has 64 KB RX buffers) because the user thread > will split packets, calling multiple times transport->stream_enqueue() > in net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c:vsock_stream_sendmsg() while the > vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() send them to the guest. Sorry, I don't understand the reasoning. Overall this creates more work. Are you saying the benefit is that vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() can run "early" and notify the guest of partial rx data before all of it has been enqueued? Stefan -------------- n...

...s, it help us to increase the parallelism > > (especially if the guest has 64 KB RX buffers) because the user thread > > will split packets, calling multiple times transport->stream_enqueue() > > in net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c:vsock_stream_sendmsg() while the > > vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() send them to the guest. > > Sorry, I don't understand the reasoning. Overall this creates more > work. Are you saying the benefit is that > vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() can run "early" and notify the guest of > partial rx data before all of it has been enqueued?...

...s, it help us to increase the parallelism > > (especially if the guest has 64 KB RX buffers) because the user thread > > will split packets, calling multiple times transport->stream_enqueue() > > in net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c:vsock_stream_sendmsg() while the > > vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() send them to the guest. > > Sorry, I don't understand the reasoning. Overall this creates more > work. Are you saying the benefit is that > vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() can run "early" and notify the guest of > partial rx data before all of it has been enqueued?...

...lly it was a socket on host as well I believe? For vsock, Host->Guest, it's code flow as follows: Server call send() -> sendmsg(); (vsock_stream_sendmsg) -> virtio_trasnport_send_pkt_info -> alloc pkt, add pkt to send_pkt_list, wake up vhost_worker Vhost_worker -> vhost_transport_send_pkt_work -> get pkt from send_pkt_list -> get vq input desc and then fill data to desc addr -> update used ring and then signal guest In the whole process, host don't call recvmsg() because it is a net device, and it also receives any messages. For vhost-net, I understand it is a...

...lly it was a socket on host as well I believe? For vsock, Host->Guest, it's code flow as follows: Server call send() -> sendmsg(); (vsock_stream_sendmsg) -> virtio_trasnport_send_pkt_info -> alloc pkt, add pkt to send_pkt_list, wake up vhost_worker Vhost_worker -> vhost_transport_send_pkt_work -> get pkt from send_pkt_list -> get vq input desc and then fill data to desc addr -> update used ring and then signal guest In the whole process, host don't call recvmsg() because it is a net device, and it also receives any messages. For vhost-net, I understand it is a...

...c[i].iov_base, tmp_len, &iov_iter); + if (nbytes != tmp_len) { + virtio_transport_free_pkt(pkt); + vq_err(vq, "Faulted on copying pkt buf\n"); + break; + } + + remain_len -= tmp_len; } vhost_add_used_n(vq, vq->heads, headcount); @@ -341,6 +351,7 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) struct iov_iter iov_iter; size_t nbytes; size_t len; + void *buf; if (in != 0) { vq_err(vq, "Expected 0 input buffers, got %u\n", in); @@ -375,13 +386,17 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) return NULL; } - pkt-&...

...c[i].iov_base, tmp_len, &iov_iter); + if (nbytes != tmp_len) { + virtio_transport_free_pkt(pkt); + vq_err(vq, "Faulted on copying pkt buf\n"); + break; + } + + remain_len -= tmp_len; } vhost_add_used_n(vq, vq->heads, headcount); @@ -341,6 +351,7 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) struct iov_iter iov_iter; size_t nbytes; size_t len; + void *buf; if (in != 0) { vq_err(vq, "Expected 0 input buffers, got %u\n", in); @@ -375,13 +386,17 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) return NULL; } - pkt-&...

..._transport_free_pkt(pkt); >> + vq_err(vq, "Faulted on copying pkt buf\n"); >> + break; >> + } >> + >> + remain_len -= tmp_len; >> } >> >> vhost_add_used_n(vq, vq->heads, headcount); >> @@ -341,6 +351,7 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) >> struct iov_iter iov_iter; >> size_t nbytes; >> size_t len; >> + void *buf; >> >> if (in != 0) { >> vq_err(vq, "Expected 0 input buffers, got %u\n", in); >> @@ -375,13 +386,17 @@ static void vhost_transp...

..._transport_free_pkt(pkt); >> + vq_err(vq, "Faulted on copying pkt buf\n"); >> + break; >> + } >> + >> + remain_len -= tmp_len; >> } >> >> vhost_add_used_n(vq, vq->heads, headcount); >> @@ -341,6 +351,7 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) >> struct iov_iter iov_iter; >> size_t nbytes; >> size_t len; >> + void *buf; >> >> if (in != 0) { >> vq_err(vq, "Expected 0 input buffers, got %u\n", in); >> @@ -375,13 +386,17 @@ static void vhost_transp...

...ng virtio vsock server. > > > > > > The abnormal flow looks like: > > > host-userspace vhost vsock guest vsock > > > ============== =========== ============ > > > connect() --------> vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() initializing > > > | vq->private_data==NULL > > > | will not be queued > > > V > > > schedule_timeout(2s) > > > vhost_vsock_start() <--------- device ready > > &...

...ng virtio vsock server. > > > > > > The abnormal flow looks like: > > > host-userspace vhost vsock guest vsock > > > ============== =========== ============ > > > connect() --------> vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() initializing > > > | vq->private_data==NULL > > > | will not be queued > > > V > > > schedule_timeout(2s) > > > vhost_vsock_start() <--------- device ready > > &...

...se refcnt taken in vhost_transport_send_pkt */ > + sock_put(sk); > + > + virtio_transport_free_pkt(pkt); > + } > + vhost_signal(&vsock->dev, vq); I think you should not signal if used was not updated. > + mutex_unlock(&vq->mutex); > +} > + > +static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) > +{ > + struct vhost_virtqueue *vq; > + struct vhost_vsock *vsock; > + > + vsock = container_of(work, struct vhost_vsock, send_pkt_work); > + vq = &vsock->vqs[VSOCK_VQ_RX].vq; > + > + vhost_transport_do_send_pkt(vsock, vq); > +} > + &gt...

...se refcnt taken in vhost_transport_send_pkt */ > + sock_put(sk); > + > + virtio_transport_free_pkt(pkt); > + } > + vhost_signal(&vsock->dev, vq); I think you should not signal if used was not updated. > + mutex_unlock(&vq->mutex); > +} > + > +static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) > +{ > + struct vhost_virtqueue *vq; > + struct vhost_vsock *vsock; > + > + vsock = container_of(work, struct vhost_vsock, send_pkt_work); > + vq = &vsock->vqs[VSOCK_VQ_RX].vq; > + > + vhost_transport_do_send_pkt(vsock, vq); > +} > + &gt...

...ytes != tmp_len) { > + virtio_transport_free_pkt(pkt); > + vq_err(vq, "Faulted on copying pkt buf\n"); > + break; > + } > + > + remain_len -= tmp_len; > } > > vhost_add_used_n(vq, vq->heads, headcount); > @@ -341,6 +351,7 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) > struct iov_iter iov_iter; > size_t nbytes; > size_t len; > + void *buf; > > if (in != 0) { > vq_err(vq, "Expected 0 input buffers, got %u\n", in); > @@ -375,13 +386,17 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_...

...gt;len); + + virtio_transport_dec_tx_pkt(pkt); + + sk = sk_vsock(pkt->trans->vsk); + /* Release refcnt taken in vhost_transport_send_pkt */ + sock_put(sk); + + virtio_transport_free_pkt(pkt); + } + vhost_signal(&vsock->dev, vq); + mutex_unlock(&vq->mutex); +} + +static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) +{ + struct vhost_virtqueue *vq; + struct vhost_vsock *vsock; + + vsock = container_of(work, struct vhost_vsock, send_pkt_work); + vq = &vsock->vqs[VSOCK_VQ_RX].vq; + + vhost_transport_do_send_pkt(vsock, vq); +} + +static int +vhost_transport_send_pkt(struct vsock_so...

...vsock client tries to connect > an initializing virtio vsock server. > > The abnormal flow looks like: > host-userspace vhost vsock guest vsock > ============== =========== ============ > connect() --------> vhost_transport_send_pkt_work() initializing > | vq->private_data==NULL > | will not be queued > V > schedule_timeout(2s) > vhost_vsock_start() <--------- device ready > set vq->private_data > &...

...vq_err(vq, "Faulted on copying pkt buf\n"); > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + > >> + remain_len -= tmp_len; > >> } > >> > >> vhost_add_used_n(vq, vq->heads, headcount); > >> @@ -341,6 +351,7 @@ static void vhost_transport_send_pkt_work(struct vhost_work *work) > >> struct iov_iter iov_iter; > >> size_t nbytes; > >> size_t len; > >> + void *buf; > >> > >> if (in != 0) { > >> vq_err(vq, "Expected 0 input buffers, got %u\n", in); > >> @@ -37...

...t;Guest, it's code flow as follows: >> Server call send() >> -> sendmsg(); (vsock_stream_sendmsg) >> -> virtio_trasnport_send_pkt_info >> -> alloc pkt, add pkt to send_pkt_list, wake up vhost_worker >> >> Vhost_worker >> -> vhost_transport_send_pkt_work >> -> get pkt from send_pkt_list >> -> get vq input desc and then fill data to desc addr >> -> update used ring and then signal guest >> >> In the whole process, host don't call recvmsg() because it is a net device, and >> it also rece...