On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 11:03:13PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:12:53PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > A virtio driver does virtqueue_add_buf() multiple times before finally
> > calling virtqueue_kick(); previously we only exposed the added buffers
> > in the virtqueue_kick() call. This means we don't need a memory
> > barrier in virtqueue_add_buf(), but it reduces concurrency as the
> > device (ie. host) can't see the buffers until the kick.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In the past I played with a patch like this, but I didn't see a
> performance gain either way. Do you see any gain?
>
> I'm a bit concerned that with this patch, a buggy driver that
> adds more than 2^16 descriptors without a kick
> would seem to work sometimes. Let's add WARN_ON(vq->num_added > (1 << 16))?
Thinking about it more - it might be tricky for drivers
to ensure this. add used to fail when vq is full, but now
driver might do get between add and notify:
lock
add_buf * N
prep
unlock
lock
get_buf * N
unlock
lock
add_buf
prep
unlock
notify
and since add was followed by get, this doesn't fail.
So the right thing to do I think is to either ignore indexes and assume
a kick is needed, something like:
if vq->num_added >= (1 << 15))
needs_kick = true
(note: maybe it's 1<<16, and maybe >, but 1<<15 is plenty anyway)
Or alternatively, fail add when num_added is too large.
> > ---
> > drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > @@ -227,9 +227,15 @@ add_head:
> >
> > /* Put entry in available array (but don't update avail->idx until they
> > * do sync). */
> > - avail = ((vq->vring.avail->idx + vq->num_added++) & (vq->vring.num-1));
> > + avail = (vq->vring.avail->idx & (vq->vring.num-1));
> > vq->vring.avail->ring[avail] = head;
> >
> > + /* Descriptors and available array need to be set before we expose the
> > + * new available array entries. */
> > + virtio_wmb();
> > + vq->vring.avail->idx++;
> > + vq->num_added++;
> > +
> > pr_debug("Added buffer head %i to %p\n", head, vq);
> > END_USE(vq);
> >
> > @@ -248,13 +254,10 @@ bool virtqueue_kick_prepare(struct virtq
> > * new available array entries. */
> > virtio_wmb();
> >
> > - old = vq->vring.avail->idx;
> > - new = vq->vring.avail->idx = old + vq->num_added;
> > + old = vq->vring.avail->idx - vq->num_added;
> > + new = vq->vring.avail->idx;
> > vq->num_added = 0;
> >
> > - /* Need to update avail index before checking if we should notify */
> > - virtio_mb();
> > -
> > if (vq->event) {
> > needs_kick = vring_need_event(vring_avail_event(&vq->vring),
> > new, old);
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Virtualization mailing list
> > Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
