From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C907AC32788 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:13:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80496214C4 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:13:47 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 80496214C4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728353AbeJKTkn (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2018 15:40:43 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:47148 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726212AbeJKTkm (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2018 15:40:42 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Oct 2018 05:13:44 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,368,1534834800"; d="scan'208";a="264809462" Received: from btwcube1.sh.intel.com (HELO debian) ([10.67.104.158]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Oct 2018 05:13:37 -0700 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 20:12:21 +0800 From: Tiwei Bie To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Jason Wang , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, wexu@redhat.com, jfreimann@redhat.com Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/5] virtio: support packed ring Message-ID: <20181011121221.GA27106@debian> References: <20180827170005-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180907012225.GA32677@debian> <20180907084509-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180910030053.GA15645@debian> <20180911053726.GA7472@debian> <20180912121457-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180913085919.GA42049@fbsd1.sh.intel.com> <98d6bd4d-45e2-4207-e961-782f649e0139@redhat.com> <20181010103335-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20181010103335-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:36:26AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 05:47:29PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2018年09月13日 16:59, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > > If what you say is true then we should take a careful look > > > > and not supporting these generic things with packed layout. > > > > Once we do support them it will be too late and we won't > > > > be able to get performance back. > > > I think it's a good point that we don't need to support > > > everything in packed ring (especially these which would > > > hurt the performance), as the packed ring aims at high > > > performance. I'm also wondering about the features. Is > > > there any possibility that we won't support the out of > > > order processing (at least not by default) in packed ring? > > > If I didn't miss anything, the need to support out of order > > > processing in packed ring will make the data structure > > > inside the driver not cache friendly which is similar to > > > the case of the descriptor table in the split ring (the > > > difference is that, it only happens in driver now). > > > > Out of order is not the only user, DMA is another one. We don't have used > > ring(len), so we need to maintain buffer length somewhere even for in order > > device. > > For a bunch of systems dma unmap is a nop so we do not really > need to maintain it. It's a question of an API to detect that > and optimize for it. I posted a proposed patch for that - > want to try using that? Yeah, definitely! > > > But if it's not too late, I second for a OUT_OF_ORDER feature. > > Starting from in order can have much simpler code in driver. > > > > Thanks > > It's tricky to change the flag polarity because of compatibility > with legacy interfaces. Why is this such a big deal? > > Let's teach drivers about IN_ORDER, then if devices > are in order it will get enabled by default. Yeah, make sense. Besides, I have done some further profiling and debugging both in kernel driver and DPDK vhost. Previously I was mislead by a bug in vhost code. I will send a patch to fix that bug. With that bug fixed, the performance of packed ring in the test between kernel driver and DPDK vhost is better now. I will send a new series soon. Thanks! > > -- > MST From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tiwei Bie Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/5] virtio: support packed ring Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 20:12:21 +0800 Message-ID: <20181011121221.GA27106@debian> References: <20180827170005-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180907012225.GA32677@debian> <20180907084509-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180910030053.GA15645@debian> <20180911053726.GA7472@debian> <20180912121457-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180913085919.GA42049@fbsd1.sh.intel.com> <98d6bd4d-45e2-4207-e961-782f649e0139@redhat.com> <20181010103335-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Jason Wang , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, wexu@redhat.com, jfreimann@redhat.com To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: Sender: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181010103335-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:36:26AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 05:47:29PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2018年09月13日 16:59, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > > If what you say is true then we should take a careful look > > > > and not supporting these generic things with packed layout. > > > > Once we do support them it will be too late and we won't > > > > be able to get performance back. > > > I think it's a good point that we don't need to support > > > everything in packed ring (especially these which would > > > hurt the performance), as the packed ring aims at high > > > performance. I'm also wondering about the features. Is > > > there any possibility that we won't support the out of > > > order processing (at least not by default) in packed ring? > > > If I didn't miss anything, the need to support out of order > > > processing in packed ring will make the data structure > > > inside the driver not cache friendly which is similar to > > > the case of the descriptor table in the split ring (the > > > difference is that, it only happens in driver now). > > > > Out of order is not the only user, DMA is another one. We don't have used > > ring(len), so we need to maintain buffer length somewhere even for in order > > device. > > For a bunch of systems dma unmap is a nop so we do not really > need to maintain it. It's a question of an API to detect that > and optimize for it. I posted a proposed patch for that - > want to try using that? Yeah, definitely! > > > But if it's not too late, I second for a OUT_OF_ORDER feature. > > Starting from in order can have much simpler code in driver. > > > > Thanks > > It's tricky to change the flag polarity because of compatibility > with legacy interfaces. Why is this such a big deal? > > Let's teach drivers about IN_ORDER, then if devices > are in order it will get enabled by default. Yeah, make sense. Besides, I have done some further profiling and debugging both in kernel driver and DPDK vhost. Previously I was mislead by a bug in vhost code. I will send a patch to fix that bug. With that bug fixed, the performance of packed ring in the test between kernel driver and DPDK vhost is better now. I will send a new series soon. Thanks! > > -- > MST From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: virtio-dev-return-4893-cohuck=redhat.com@lists.oasis-open.org Sender: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Received: from lists.oasis-open.org (oasis-open.org [10.110.1.242]) by lists.oasis-open.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2577F985CB1 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:13:46 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 20:12:21 +0800 From: Tiwei Bie Message-ID: <20181011121221.GA27106@debian> References: <20180827170005-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180907012225.GA32677@debian> <20180907084509-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180910030053.GA15645@debian> <20180911053726.GA7472@debian> <20180912121457-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180913085919.GA42049@fbsd1.sh.intel.com> <98d6bd4d-45e2-4207-e961-782f649e0139@redhat.com> <20181010103335-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20181010103335-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/5] virtio: support packed ring To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Jason Wang , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, wexu@redhat.com, jfreimann@redhat.com List-ID: On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:36:26AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 05:47:29PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2018年09月13日 16:59, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > > > If what you say is true then we should take a careful look > > > > and not supporting these generic things with packed layout. > > > > Once we do support them it will be too late and we won't > > > > be able to get performance back. > > > I think it's a good point that we don't need to support > > > everything in packed ring (especially these which would > > > hurt the performance), as the packed ring aims at high > > > performance. I'm also wondering about the features. Is > > > there any possibility that we won't support the out of > > > order processing (at least not by default) in packed ring? > > > If I didn't miss anything, the need to support out of order > > > processing in packed ring will make the data structure > > > inside the driver not cache friendly which is similar to > > > the case of the descriptor table in the split ring (the > > > difference is that, it only happens in driver now). > > > > Out of order is not the only user, DMA is another one. We don't have used > > ring(len), so we need to maintain buffer length somewhere even for in order > > device. > > For a bunch of systems dma unmap is a nop so we do not really > need to maintain it. It's a question of an API to detect that > and optimize for it. I posted a proposed patch for that - > want to try using that? Yeah, definitely! > > > But if it's not too late, I second for a OUT_OF_ORDER feature. > > Starting from in order can have much simpler code in driver. > > > > Thanks > > It's tricky to change the flag polarity because of compatibility > with legacy interfaces. Why is this such a big deal? > > Let's teach drivers about IN_ORDER, then if devices > are in order it will get enabled by default. Yeah, make sense. Besides, I have done some further profiling and debugging both in kernel driver and DPDK vhost. Previously I was mislead by a bug in vhost code. I will send a patch to fix that bug. With that bug fixed, the performance of packed ring in the test between kernel driver and DPDK vhost is better now. I will send a new series soon. Thanks! > > -- > MST --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org