Re: [PATCH] vhost_net: use packet weight for rx handler, too

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

 



From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 10:34:36 +0200

> Similar to commit a2ac99905f1e ("vhost-net: set packet weight of
> tx polling to 2 * vq size"), we need a packet-based limit for
> handler_rx, too - elsewhere, under rx flood with small packets,
> tx can be delayed for a very long time, even without busypolling.
> 
> The pkt limit applied to handle_rx must be the same applied by
> handle_tx, or we will get unfair scheduling between rx and tx.
> Tying such limit to the queue length makes it less effective for
> large queue length values and can introduce large process
> scheduler latencies, so a constant valued is used - likewise
> the existing bytes limit.
> 
> The selected limit has been validated with PVP[1] performance
> test with different queue sizes:
> 
> queue size		256	512	1024
> 
> baseline		366	354	362
> weight 128		715	723	670
> weight 256		740	745	733
> weight 512		600	460	583
> weight 1024		423	427	418
> 
> A packet weight of 256 gives peek performances in under all the
> tested scenarios.
> 
> No measurable regression in unidirectional performance tests has
> been detected.
> 
> [1] https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2017/06/05/measuring-and-comparing-open-vswitch-performance/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>

Applied to net-next, thanks.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization



[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux