similar to: [PATCH 00/18] virtio and vhost-net performance enhancements

OK, here is the large patchset that implements the virtio spec update that I sent earlier (the spec itself needs a minor update, will send that out too next week, but I think we are on the same page here already). It supercedes the PUBLISH_USED_IDX patches I sent out earlier. What will follow will be a patchset that actually includes 4 sets of patches. I note below their status. Please consider

OK, here is the large patchset that implements the virtio spec update that I sent earlier (the spec itself needs a minor update, will send that out too next week, but I think we are on the same page here already). It supercedes the PUBLISH_USED_IDX patches I sent out earlier. What will follow will be a patchset that actually includes 4 sets of patches. I note below their status. Please consider

OK, here's a patch that implements the virtio spec update that I sent earlier. It supercedes the PUBLISH_USED_IDX patches I sent out earlier. Support is added in both userspace and vhost-net. I see nice performance improvements: e.g. from 12 to 18 Gbit/s host to guest with netperf, but did not spend a lot of time testing performance. I hope others will try this out and report. Note: there

OK, here's a patch that implements the virtio spec update that I sent earlier. It supercedes the PUBLISH_USED_IDX patches I sent out earlier. Support is added in both userspace and vhost-net. I see nice performance improvements: e.g. from 12 to 18 Gbit/s host to guest with netperf, but did not spend a lot of time testing performance. I hope others will try this out and report. Note: there

OK, here's a new attempt to use the new capacity api. I also added more comments to clarify the logic. Hope this is more readable. Let me know pls. This is on top of the patches applied by Rusty. Warning: untested. Posting now to give people chance to comment on the API. Changes from v1: - fix comment in patch 2 to correct confusion noted by Rusty - rewrite patch 3 along the lines

OK, here's a new attempt to use the new capacity api. I also added more comments to clarify the logic. Hope this is more readable. Let me know pls. This is on top of the patches applied by Rusty. Warning: untested. Posting now to give people chance to comment on the API. Changes from v1: - fix comment in patch 2 to correct confusion noted by Rusty - rewrite patch 3 along the lines

Hello everyone, This RFC implements packed ring support in virtio driver. Some simple functional tests have been done with Jason's packed ring implementation in vhost: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/23/12 Both of ping and netperf worked as expected (with EVENT_IDX disabled). But there are below known issues: 1. Reloading the guest driver will break the Tx/Rx; 2. Zeroing the flags when

This patchset tries to go towards implementing both virtio-1 compliant and transitional virtio drivers in Linux. Branch available at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvms390/linux virtio-1 This is based on some old patches by Rusty to handle extended feature bits and endianness conversions. Thomas implemented the new virtio-ccw transport revision command, and I hacked up some

This patchset tries to go towards implementing both virtio-1 compliant and transitional virtio drivers in Linux. Branch available at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvms390/linux virtio-1 This is based on some old patches by Rusty to handle extended feature bits and endianness conversions. Thomas implemented the new virtio-ccw transport revision command, and I hacked up some

This introduces vringh, which are generic accessors for virtio rings (host side). There's a host-side implementation in vhost, but it assumes that the rings are in userspace, and is tied to the vhost implementation. I have patches to adapt it to use vringh, but I'm pushing this in the next merge window for Sjur, who has CAIF patches which need it. This also includes a test program in

This introduces vringh, which are generic accessors for virtio rings (host side). There's a host-side implementation in vhost, but it assumes that the rings are in userspace, and is tied to the vhost implementation. I have patches to adapt it to use vringh, but I'm pushing this in the next merge window for Sjur, who has CAIF patches which need it. This also includes a test program in

OK, here's a new attempt to use the new capacity api. I also added more comments to clarify the logic. Hope this is more readable. Let me know pls. This is on top of the patches applied by Rusty. Note: there are now actually 2 calls to fee_old_xmit_skbs on data path so instead of passing flag '2' to the second one I thought we can just make each call free up at least 1 skb. This

OK, here's a new attempt to use the new capacity api. I also added more comments to clarify the logic. Hope this is more readable. Let me know pls. This is on top of the patches applied by Rusty. Note: there are now actually 2 calls to fee_old_xmit_skbs on data path so instead of passing flag '2' to the second one I thought we can just make each call free up at least 1 skb. This

Getting use of virtio rings correct is tricky, and a recent patch saw an implementation of in-kernel rings (as separate from userspace). This patch attempts to abstract the business of dealing with the virtio ring layout from the access (userspace or direct); to do this, we use function pointers, which gcc inlines correctly. Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> ---

Getting use of virtio rings correct is tricky, and a recent patch saw an implementation of in-kernel rings (as separate from userspace). This patch attempts to abstract the business of dealing with the virtio ring layout from the access (userspace or direct); to do this, we use function pointers, which gcc inlines correctly. Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> ---

On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 09:11:16AM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 06:42:57PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 11:12:55PM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 04:51:01PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 03:28:19PM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > > > On Wed, May

On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 09:11:16AM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 06:42:57PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 11:12:55PM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 04:51:01PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 03:28:19PM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > > > On Wed, May

Here's a patchset to update tools/virtio with changes in 3.8, as well as the proposed API extension. Useful to see whether the extra level of indirection adds measureable overhead. I will upstream at least patch 1 soon. Michael S. Tsirkin (2): tools/virtio: fix build for 3.8 tools/virtio: update for the new virtio API drivers/vhost/test.c | 4 +++- tools/virtio/Makefile

Here's a patchset to update tools/virtio with changes in 3.8, as well as the proposed API extension. Useful to see whether the extra level of indirection adds measureable overhead. I will upstream at least patch 1 soon. Michael S. Tsirkin (2): tools/virtio: fix build for 3.8 tools/virtio: update for the new virtio API drivers/vhost/test.c | 4 +++- tools/virtio/Makefile

On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 03:28:19PM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 10:51:06AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2018?04?25? 13:15, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > This commit introduces the event idx support in packed > > > ring. This feature is temporarily disabled, because the > > > implementation in this patch may not work as expected, > > >