search for: vsock_nodelay

...troduce something like that. Current implementation directly copy the buffer from the user-space in a virtio_vsock_pkt and enqueue it to be transmitted. Maybe we can introduce a buffer per socket where accumulate bytes and send it when it is full or when a timer is fired . We can also introduce a VSOCK_NODELAY (maybe using the same value of TCP_NODELAY for compatibility) to send the buffer immediately for low-latency use cases. What do you think? Thanks, Stefano

...troduce something like that. Current implementation directly copy the buffer from the user-space in a virtio_vsock_pkt and enqueue it to be transmitted. Maybe we can introduce a buffer per socket where accumulate bytes and send it when it is full or when a timer is fired . We can also introduce a VSOCK_NODELAY (maybe using the same value of TCP_NODELAY for compatibility) to send the buffer immediately for low-latency use cases. What do you think? Thanks, Stefano

...> Current implementation directly copy the buffer from the user-space in a > virtio_vsock_pkt and enqueue it to be transmitted. > > Maybe we can introduce a buffer per socket where accumulate bytes and > send it when it is full or when a timer is fired . We can also introduce > a VSOCK_NODELAY (maybe using the same value of TCP_NODELAY for > compatibility) to send the buffer immediately for low-latency use cases. > > What do you think? Today virtio-vsock implements a 1:1 sendmsg():packet relationship because it's simple. But there's no need for the guest to enqueue mu...

On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 11:52:46AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > I simply love it that you have analysed the individual impact of > each patch! Great job! Thanks! I followed Stefan's suggestions! > > For comparison's sake, it could be IMHO benefitial to add a column > with virtio-net+vhost-net performance. > > This will both give us an idea about whether the

On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 11:52:46AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > I simply love it that you have analysed the individual impact of > each patch! Great job! Thanks! I followed Stefan's suggestions! > > For comparison's sake, it could be IMHO benefitial to add a column > with virtio-net+vhost-net performance. > > This will both give us an idea about whether the