On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 3:58 PM Guo Zhi <qtxuning1999@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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); Expanding my previous mail on patch 1, you can also use this in vsock tx queue code. This way, no modifications to vhost.c functions are needed. Thanks! > no_more_replies: > if (added) > vhost_signal(&vsock->dev, vq); > -- > 2.17.1 >
