Displaying 20 results from an estimated 5000 matches similar to: "[PATCH] virtio-net: lower min ring num_free for efficiency"
2019 Sep 02
0
[PATCH v3] virtio-net: lower min ring num_free for efficiency
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 02:51:23AM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
> This change lowers ring buffer reclaim threshold from 1/2*queue to budget
> for better performance. According to our test with qemu + dpdk, packet
> dropping happens when the guest is not able to provide free buffer in
> avail ring timely with default 1/2*queue. The value in the patch has been
> tested and does show better
2019 Aug 13
0
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:05:03PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
>
> On 2019/7/20 0:13, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 03:31:29PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
> >> On 2019/7/19 22:29, Jiang wrote:
> >>> On 2019/7/19 10:36, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>> On 2019/7/18 ??10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019
2019 Jul 18
2
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold num_free configurable for better performance, while it's hard coded as 1/2 * queue now.
According to our test with qemu + dpdk, packet dropping happens when the guest is not able to provide free buffer in avail ring timely.
Smaller value of num_free does decrease the number of packet dropping during our test as it makes virtio_net reclaim buffer
2019 Jul 18
2
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold num_free configurable for better performance, while it's hard coded as 1/2 * queue now.
According to our test with qemu + dpdk, packet dropping happens when the guest is not able to provide free buffer in avail ring timely.
Smaller value of num_free does decrease the number of packet dropping during our test as it makes virtio_net reclaim buffer
2019 Jul 18
0
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:55:50PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
> This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold num_free configurable
> for better performance, while it's hard coded as 1/2 * queue now.
> According to our test with qemu + dpdk, packet dropping happens when
> the guest is not able to provide free buffer in avail ring timely.
> Smaller value of num_free does decrease
2019 Jul 23
2
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On 2019/7/20 0:13, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 03:31:29PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
>> On 2019/7/19 22:29, Jiang wrote:
>>> On 2019/7/19 10:36, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> On 2019/7/18 ??10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:42:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019
2019 Jul 23
2
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On 2019/7/20 0:13, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 03:31:29PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
>> On 2019/7/19 22:29, Jiang wrote:
>>> On 2019/7/19 10:36, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> On 2019/7/18 ??10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:42:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019
2019 Jul 19
1
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On 2019/7/19 22:29, Jiang wrote:
>
> On 2019/7/19 10:36, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>> On 2019/7/18 ??10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:42:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:01:05PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>> On 2019/7/18 ??9:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>>> On
2019 Jul 19
0
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 03:31:29PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
>
> On 2019/7/19 22:29, Jiang wrote:
> >
> > On 2019/7/19 10:36, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2019/7/18 ??10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:42:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:01:05PM +0800, Jason Wang
2019 Jul 18
0
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:01:05PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2019/7/18 ??9:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:55:50PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
> > > This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold num_free configurable
> > > for better performance, while it's hard coded as 1/2 * queue now.
> > > According to our test with
2019 Jul 19
0
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On 2019/7/18 ??10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:42:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:01:05PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> On 2019/7/18 ??9:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:55:50PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
>>>>> This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold
2019 Jul 18
4
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:42:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:01:05PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> > On 2019/7/18 ??9:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:55:50PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
> > > > This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold num_free configurable
> > > > for better
2019 Jul 18
4
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:42:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:01:05PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> > On 2019/7/18 ??9:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:55:50PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
> > > > This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold num_free configurable
> > > > for better
2019 Jul 18
2
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On 2019/7/18 ??9:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:55:50PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
>> This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold num_free configurable
>> for better performance, while it's hard coded as 1/2 * queue now.
>> According to our test with qemu + dpdk, packet dropping happens when
>> the guest is not able to provide free buffer
2019 Jul 18
2
[PATCH] virtio-net: parameterize min ring num_free for virtio receive
On 2019/7/18 ??9:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:55:50PM +0000, ? jiang wrote:
>> This change makes ring buffer reclaim threshold num_free configurable
>> for better performance, while it's hard coded as 1/2 * queue now.
>> According to our test with qemu + dpdk, packet dropping happens when
>> the guest is not able to provide free buffer
2014 Nov 24
0
[PATCH v3 19/41] virtio_net: pass vi around
Too many places poke at [rs]q->vq->vdev->priv just to get
the the vi structure. Let's just pass the pointer around: seems
cleaner, and might even be faster.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
---
drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
2014 Nov 24
0
[PATCH v3 19/41] virtio_net: pass vi around
Too many places poke at [rs]q->vq->vdev->priv just to get
the the vi structure. Let's just pass the pointer around: seems
cleaner, and might even be faster.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
---
drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
2014 Nov 27
0
[PATCH v5 22/45] virtio_net: pass vi around
Too many places poke at [rs]q->vq->vdev->priv just to get
the vi structure. Let's just pass the pointer around: seems
cleaner, and might even be faster.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck at de.ibm.com>
---
drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+),
2014 Nov 27
0
[PATCH v6 23/46] virtio_net: pass vi around
Too many places poke at [rs]q->vq->vdev->priv just to get
the vi structure. Let's just pass the pointer around: seems
cleaner, and might even be faster.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck at de.ibm.com>
---
drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+),
2014 Nov 30
0
[PATCH v7 23/46] virtio_net: pass vi around
Too many places poke at [rs]q->vq->vdev->priv just to get
the vi structure. Let's just pass the pointer around: seems
cleaner, and might even be faster.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck at de.ibm.com>
---
drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+),