Vsock uses buffers in order, and for tx driver doesn't have to know the length of the buffer. So we can do a batch for vsock if in order negotiated, only write one used ring for a batch of buffers Signed-off-by: Guo Zhi <qtxuning1999@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c index 368330417bde..b0108009c39a 100644 --- a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c +++ b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c @@ -500,6 +500,7 @@ static void vhost_vsock_handle_tx_kick(struct vhost_work *work) int head, pkts = 0, total_len = 0; unsigned int out, in; bool added = false; + int last_head = -1; mutex_lock(&vq->mutex); @@ -551,10 +552,16 @@ static void vhost_vsock_handle_tx_kick(struct vhost_work *work) else virtio_transport_free_pkt(pkt); - vhost_add_used(vq, head, 0); + if (!vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER)) + vhost_add_used(vq, head, 0); + else + last_head = head; added = true; } while(likely(!vhost_exceeds_weight(vq, ++pkts, total_len))); + /* If in order feature negotiaged, we can do a batch to increase performance */ + if (vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER) && last_head != -1) + vhost_add_used(vq, last_head, 0); no_more_replies: if (added) vhost_signal(&vsock->dev, vq); -- 2.17.1
