Virtualization - Mar 2017 - [PATCH net-next 7/8] vhost_net: try batch dequing from skb array

On 2017?03?23? 13:34, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
>>
>>> +{
>>> +    if (rvq->rh != rvq->rt)
>>> +        goto out;
>>> +
>>> +    rvq->rh = rvq->rt = 0;
>>> +    rvq->rt = skb_array_consume_batched_bh(rvq->rx_array,
rvq->rxq,
>>> +                        VHOST_RX_BATCH);
>> A comment explaining why is is -bh would be helpful.
>
> Ok.
>
> Thanks 
Rethink about this. It looks like -bh is not needed in this case since 
no consumer run in bh.

Thanks

Hi Jason,
> 
> On 2017?03?23? 13:34, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> +{
> >>> +    if (rvq->rh != rvq->rt)
> >>> +        goto out;
> >>> +
> >>> +    rvq->rh = rvq->rt = 0;
> >>> +    rvq->rt =
skb_array_consume_batched_bh(rvq->rx_array, rvq->rxq,
> >>> +                        VHOST_RX_BATCH);
> >> A comment explaining why is is -bh would be helpful.
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> > Thanks
> 
> Rethink about this. It looks like -bh is not needed in this case since
> no consumer run in bh.
In that case do we need other variants of
"ptr_ring_consume_batched_*()" functions.
Are we planning to use them in future? 
> 
> Thanks
>

On 2017?03?29? 18:46, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
>> On 2017?03?23? 13:34, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +    if (rvq->rh != rvq->rt)
>>>>> +        goto out;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    rvq->rh = rvq->rt = 0;
>>>>> +    rvq->rt =
skb_array_consume_batched_bh(rvq->rx_array, rvq->rxq,
>>>>> +                        VHOST_RX_BATCH);
>>>> A comment explaining why is is -bh would be helpful.
>>> Ok.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>> Rethink about this. It looks like -bh is not needed in this case since
>> no consumer run in bh.
> In that case do we need other variants of
"ptr_ring_consume_batched_*()" functions.
> Are we planning to use them in future?
I think we'd better keep them, since it serves as helpers. You can see 
that not all the helpers in ptr_ring has real users, but they were 
prepared for the future use.

Thanks
>
>> Thanks
>>