similar to: [PATCH net-next RFC V3 0/3] basic busy polling support for vhost_net

This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The idea is simple: at the end of tx/rx processing, busy polling for new tx added descriptor and rx receive socket for a while. The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was specified ioctl. Test A were done through: - 50 us as busy loop timeout - Netperf 2.6 - Two machines with back to back connected mlx4 - Guest

This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The idea is simple: at the end of tx/rx processing, busy polling for new tx added descriptor and rx receive socket for a while. The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was specified ioctl. Test A were done through: - 50 us as busy loop timeout - Netperf 2.6 - Two machines with back to back connected mlx4 - Guest

Hi all: This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The idea is simple: at the end of tx/rx processing, busy polling for new tx added descriptor and rx receive socket for a while. The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was specified ioctl. Test A were done through: - 50 us as busy loop timeout - Netperf 2.6 - Two machines with back to back connected

Hi all: This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The idea is simple: at the end of tx/rx processing, busy polling for new tx added descriptor and rx receive socket for a while. The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was specified ioctl. Test A were done through: - 50 us as busy loop timeout - Netperf 2.6 - Two machines with back to back connected

Hi Jason, I understand your busy loop timeout is quite conservative at 50us. Did you try any other values? Also, did you measure how polling affects many VMs talking to each other (e.g. 20 VMs on each host, perhaps with several vNICs each, transmitting to a corresponding VM/vNIC pair on another host)? On a complete separate experiment (busy waiting on storage I/O rings on Xen), I have observed

Hi Jason, I understand your busy loop timeout is quite conservative at 50us. Did you try any other values? Also, did you measure how polling affects many VMs talking to each other (e.g. 20 VMs on each host, perhaps with several vNICs each, transmitting to a corresponding VM/vNIC pair on another host)? On a complete separate experiment (busy waiting on storage I/O rings on Xen), I have observed

This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The idea is simple: at the end of tx/rx processing, busy polling for new tx added descriptor and rx receive socket for a while. The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was specified ioctl. Test A were done through: - 50 us as busy loop timeout - Netperf 2.6 - Two machines with back to back connected mlx4 - Guest

This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The idea is simple: at the end of tx/rx processing, busy polling for new tx added descriptor and rx receive socket for a while. The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was specified ioctl. Test A were done through: - 50 us as busy loop timeout - Netperf 2.6 - Two machines with back to back connected mlx4 - Guest

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:39:45PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > This patch tries to poll for new added tx buffer or socket receive > queue for a while at the end of tx/rx processing. The maximum time > spent on polling were specified through a new kind of vring ioctl. > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> > --- > drivers/vhost/net.c | 72

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:39:45PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > This patch tries to poll for new added tx buffer or socket receive > queue for a while at the end of tx/rx processing. The maximum time > spent on polling were specified through a new kind of vring ioctl. > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> > --- > drivers/vhost/net.c | 72

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:11:35AM +0800, Yang Zhang wrote: > On 2016/1/20 22:35, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:39:45PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > >>This patch tries to poll for new added tx buffer or socket receive > >>queue for a while at the end of tx/rx processing. The maximum time > >>spent on polling were specified through a new

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:11:35AM +0800, Yang Zhang wrote: > On 2016/1/20 22:35, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:39:45PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > >>This patch tries to poll for new added tx buffer or socket receive > >>queue for a while at the end of tx/rx processing. The maximum time > >>spent on polling were specified through a new

This path introduces a helper which can give a hint for whether or not there's a work queued in the work list. Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> --- drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 6 ++++++ drivers/vhost/vhost.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c index eec2f11..d42d11e 100644 --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c +++

This path introduces a helper which can give a hint for whether or not there's a work queued in the work list. Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> --- drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 6 ++++++ drivers/vhost/vhost.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c index eec2f11..d42d11e 100644 --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c +++

Under heavy load vhost busypoll may run without suppressing notification. For example tx zerocopy callback can push tx work while handle_tx() is running, then busyloop exits due to vhost_has_work() condition and enables notification but immediately reenters handle_tx() because the pushed work was tx. In this case handle_tx() tries to disable notification again, but when using event_idx it by

Under heavy load vhost busypoll may run without suppressing notification. For example tx zerocopy callback can push tx work while handle_tx() is running, then busyloop exits due to vhost_has_work() condition and enables notification but immediately reenters handle_tx() because the pushed work was tx. In this case handle_tx() tries to disable notification again, but when using event_idx it by

Hi all: This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The idea is simple: at the end of tx processing, busy polling for new tx added descriptor and rx receive socket for a while. The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was specified through module parameter. Test were done through: - 50 us as busy loop timeout - Netperf 2.6 - Two machines with back to back

Hi all: This series tries to add basic busy polling for vhost net. The idea is simple: at the end of tx processing, busy polling for new tx added descriptor and rx receive socket for a while. The maximum number of time (in us) could be spent on busy polling was specified through module parameter. Test were done through: - 50 us as busy loop timeout - Netperf 2.6 - Two machines with back to back

From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> This patches improve the guest receive performance. On the handle_tx side, we poll the sock receive queue at the same time. handle_rx do that in the same way. For more performance report, see patch 4. v6->v7: fix issue and rebase codes: 1. on tx, busypoll will vhost_net_disable/enable_vq rx vq. [This is suggested by Toshiaki Makita

From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> This patches improve the guest receive performance. On the handle_tx side, we poll the sock receive queue at the same time. handle_rx do that in the same way. For more performance report, see patch 4, 5, 6 Tonghao Zhang (6): net: vhost: lock the vqs one by one net: vhost: replace magic number of lock annotation net: vhost: factor out