Re: [PATCH v4] virtio/vsock: replace virtio_vsock_pkt with sk_buff

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 06:13:49PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
Hello Stefano

On 24.11.2022 18:00, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
This is a net-next material, please remember to use net-next tag:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.0/process/maintainer-netdev.html#netdev-faq

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:07:49PM -0800, Bobby Eshleman wrote:
This commit changes virtio/vsock to use sk_buff instead of
virtio_vsock_pkt. Beyond better conforming to other net code, using
sk_buff allows vsock to use sk_buff-dependent features in the future
(such as sockmap) and improves throughput.

This patch introduces the following performance changes:

Tool/Config: uperf w/ 64 threads, SOCK_STREAM
Test Runs: 5, mean of results
Before: commit 95ec6bce2a0b ("Merge branch 'net-ipa-more-endpoints'")

Test: 64KB, g2h
Before: 21.63 Gb/s
After: 25.59 Gb/s (+18%)

Test: 16B, g2h
Before: 11.86 Mb/s
After: 17.41 Mb/s (+46%)

Test: 64KB, h2g
Before: 2.15 Gb/s
After: 3.6 Gb/s (+67%)

Test: 16B, h2g
Before: 14.38 Mb/s
After: 18.43 Mb/s (+28%)

Signed-off-by: Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---

The patch LGTM. I run several tests (iperf3, vsock_test,
vsock_diag_test, vhost-user-vsock, tcpdump) and IMO we are okay.

I found the following problems that I would like to report:

- vhost-user-vsock [1] is failing, but it is not an issue of this patch,
  but a spec violation in the rust-vmm/vm-virtio/virtio-vsock crate as I
  reported here [2]. We will fix it there, this patch is fine, indeed
  trying a guest with the new layout (1 descriptor for both header and
  data) with vhost-vsock in Linux 6.0, everything works perfectly.

- the new "SOCK_SEQPACKET msg bounds" [3] reworked by Arseniy fails
  intermittently with this patch.

  Using the tests currently in the kernel tree everything is fine, so
  I don't understand if it's a problem in the new test or in this
  patch. I've looked at the code again and don't seem to see any
  criticisms.

  @Arseniy @Bobby can you take a look?
Seems i've found this problem here:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/11/24/708

Being fixed - all tests passes

Good catch!

Thanks,
Stefano




[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux