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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS 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 49C18C0044C for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 03:28:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1156220819 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 03:28:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="lQIworpl" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1156220819 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.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 S1728801AbeKEMqR (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2018 07:46:17 -0500 Received: from mail-qk1-f195.google.com ([209.85.222.195]:45455 "EHLO mail-qk1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726810AbeKEMqR (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2018 07:46:17 -0500 Received: by mail-qk1-f195.google.com with SMTP id d135so12404623qkc.12; Sun, 04 Nov 2018 19:28:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QkEN5lBFbysuSJlznNOpnoLwk60CYb8iNqwsMQR7zaA=; b=lQIworplozpQckFgCAixbTz96tR4TXAYGrGGFn6sLehsVoN+OHZqLPVkjvlPa+Func lnO8eYmcbqSo20YIOwiZGI/S0q1comLYJxvuqZP3+67qC+2I8ruOvt3orOj8OjpHyzh1 FUWYMYsn0zfWUUSpPLz92pBTFS4Jr5pjA7i8J1rYaEN/cRqc5Mw8MihovclxHE1iV+76 3wuxBFnUGvByK1OwqMzENBh7rlJrV+rBNBvI/iJhWwFJ5uJ2fCbtVOf6lsvtTorJPjpS DNb/uiCbxm+2Rbzu+8BwavvYnRUL80a3irpfA4/H57k8I85LcKC7sZgxZW2mBh+0E8yb P42A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QkEN5lBFbysuSJlznNOpnoLwk60CYb8iNqwsMQR7zaA=; b=uZwqEDI42R+SyHPWfhS1Lxd4s63NDgqOxFvsYg+u33mCTbYtf6FIe5LG5WE/pvUth/ j9DA3KFDkP7V++0bD71gddI3ZrzSLEu4uRHOIvFm6NPtwG+VpJYlAQh9kDDRi1Plpd0a GoKeNpvE+Eq0WNZdd/yvVANX1bbHY5qd6DyPYjj438jABwwPd0lhidzEXKL5/Uz1d8aS 6TVvH905k8wwB5yr0GqMRq3qjBiECSObhsr4MbZEiAoHfSj/A4vAlscPp4YEPqoKMVtz xPVC+R2NTspqjqOBqcUC82Guhje/9OIVa/wc61cqpC1mUmltgR4/QwKcInGX692BInpW 3yjw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gI1UaDtVWbHyBuBRlBHNcGUGEnulJ2L7tlZhp8pnm1+eKdZFz9/ JyRX/U8Nk6SQ73IHhFfnnjPxv6gAXKMpuEv18toGeA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5cNVBG/G+A8k6e4LFldFeVjR2nTshf3Lyduq0V2YFxNdkSx9AZHbq9HG39O9oWPHdMC3pjCBmcqJajcvcTvQw0= X-Received: by 2002:a37:b4c7:: with SMTP id d190-v6mr18272872qkf.165.1541388526516; Sun, 04 Nov 2018 19:28:46 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181102160710.3741-1-v.mayatskih@gmail.com> <20181102160710.3741-2-v.mayatskih@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Vitaly Mayatskih Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2018 22:28:34 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] vhost: add per-vq worker thread To: Jason Wang Cc: "Michael S . Tsirkin" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 9:53 PM Jason Wang wrote: > I wonder whether or not it's better to allow the device to specific the > worker here instead of forcing a per vq worker model. Then we can keep > the behavior of exist implementation and do optimization on top? I was thinking about that too, but for the sake of simplicity it sounds valid that if the user wanted 8 parallel queues for the disk, they better be parallel, i.e. worker per queue. The rest of disks that don't need high-performance, can have 1 queue specified. -- wbr, Vitaly