Re: [RFC PATCH v3] virtio/vsock: allocate multiple skbuffs on tx

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

 



On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 12:31:48AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
This adds small optimization for tx path: instead of allocating single
skbuff on every call to transport, allocate multiple skbuff's until
credit space allows, thus trying to send as much as possible data without
return to af_vsock.c.

Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <AVKrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Link to v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/2c52aa26-8181-d37a-bccd-a86bd3cbc6e1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Link to v2:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/ea5725eb-6cb5-cf15-2938-34e335a442fa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

Changelog:
v1 -> v2:
- If sent something, return number of bytes sent (even in
  case of error). Return error only if failed to sent first
  skbuff.

v2 -> v3:
- Handle case when transport callback returns unexpected value which
  is not equal to 'skb->len'. Break loop.
- Don't check for zero value of 'rest_len' before calling
  'virtio_transport_put_credit()'. Decided to add this check directly
  to 'virtio_transport_put_credit()' in separate patch.

net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
index 6564192e7f20..e0b2c6ecbe22 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
@@ -196,7 +196,8 @@ static int virtio_transport_send_pkt_info(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
	const struct virtio_transport *t_ops;
	struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs;
	u32 pkt_len = info->pkt_len;
-	struct sk_buff *skb;
+	u32 rest_len;
+	int ret;

	info->type = virtio_transport_get_type(sk_vsock(vsk));

@@ -216,10 +217,6 @@ static int virtio_transport_send_pkt_info(struct vsock_sock *vsk,

	vvs = vsk->trans;

-	/* we can send less than pkt_len bytes */
-	if (pkt_len > VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE)
-		pkt_len = VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE;
-
	/* virtio_transport_get_credit might return less than pkt_len credit */
	pkt_len = virtio_transport_get_credit(vvs, pkt_len);

@@ -227,17 +224,51 @@ static int virtio_transport_send_pkt_info(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
	if (pkt_len == 0 && info->op == VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RW)
		return pkt_len;

-	skb = virtio_transport_alloc_skb(info, pkt_len,
-					 src_cid, src_port,
-					 dst_cid, dst_port);
-	if (!skb) {
-		virtio_transport_put_credit(vvs, pkt_len);
-		return -ENOMEM;
-	}
+	ret = 0;
+	rest_len = pkt_len;
+
+	do {
+		struct sk_buff *skb;
+		size_t skb_len;
+
+		skb_len = min_t(u32, VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE, rest_len);
+
+		skb = virtio_transport_alloc_skb(info, skb_len,
+						 src_cid, src_port,
+						 dst_cid, dst_port);
+		if (!skb) {
+			ret = -ENOMEM;
+			break;
+		}
+
+		virtio_transport_inc_tx_pkt(vvs, skb);

-	virtio_transport_inc_tx_pkt(vvs, skb);
+		ret = t_ops->send_pkt(skb);

-	return t_ops->send_pkt(skb);
+		if (ret < 0)
+			break;
+
+		/* Both virtio and vhost 'send_pkt()' returns 'skb_len',
+		 * but for reliability use 'ret' instead of 'skb_len'.
+		 * Also if partial send happens (e.g. 'ret' != 'skb_len')
+		 * somehow, we break this loop, but account such returned
+		 * value in 'virtio_transport_put_credit()'.
+		 */
+		rest_len -= ret;
+
+		if (ret != skb_len) {
+			ret = -EFAULT;

Okay, but `ret` will be overwritten by the check we have before the
return ...

+			break;
+		}
+	} while (rest_len);
+
+	virtio_transport_put_credit(vvs, rest_len);
+
+	/* Return number of bytes, if any data has been sent. */
+	if (rest_len != pkt_len)
+		ret = pkt_len - rest_len;

... here.

Since we don't expect this condition for now, perhaps we can avoid
setting ret with -EFAULT, but we can add a WARN_ONCE (interrupting the
loop as you did here).

This way we return the partial length as we did before.

Thanks,
Stefano

+
+	return ret;
}

static bool virtio_transport_inc_rx_pkt(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs,
--
2.25.1


_______________________________________________
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