Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/2] virtio/vsock: rework deferred credit update logic

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

 



On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 10:25:40PM GMT, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
Previous calculation of 'free_space' was wrong (but worked as expected
in most cases, see below), because it didn't account number of bytes in
rx queue. Let's rework 'free_space' calculation in the following way:
as this value is considered free space at rx side from tx point of view,
it must be equal to return value of 'virtio_transport_get_credit()' at
tx side. This function uses 'tx_cnt' counter and 'peer_fwd_cnt': first
is number of transmitted bytes (without wrap), second is last 'fwd_cnt'
value received from rx. So let's use same approach at rx side during
'free_space' calculation: add 'rx_cnt' counter which is number of
received bytes (also without wrap) and subtract 'last_fwd_cnt' from it.
Now we have:
1) 'rx_cnt' == 'tx_cnt' at both sides.
2) 'last_fwd_cnt' == 'peer_fwd_cnt' - because first is last 'fwd_cnt'
  sent to tx, while second is last 'fwd_cnt' received from rx.

Now 'free_space' is handled correctly and also we don't need

mmm, I don't know if it was wrong before, maybe we could say it was less accurate.

That said, could we have the same problem now if we have a lot of producers and the virtqueue becomes full?

'low_rx_bytes' flag - this was more like a hack.

Previous calculation of 'free_space' worked (in 99% cases), because if
we take a look on behaviour of both expressions (new and previous):

'(rx_cnt - last_fwd_cnt)' and '(fwd_cnt - last_fwd_cnt)'

Both of them always grows up, with almost same "speed": only difference
is that 'rx_cnt' is incremented earlier during packet is received,
while 'fwd_cnt' in incremented when packet is read by user. So if 'rx_cnt'
grows "faster", then resulting 'free_space' become smaller also, so we
send credit updates a little bit more, but:

 * 'free_space' calculation based on 'rx_cnt' gives the same value,
   which tx sees as free space at rx side, so original idea of

Ditto, what happen if the virtqueue is full?

   'free_space' is now implemented as planned.
 * Hack with 'low_rx_bytes' now is not needed.

Yeah, so this patch should also mitigate issue reported by Alex (added in CC), right?

If yes, please mention that problem and add a Reported-by giving credit to Alex.


Also here is some performance comparison between both versions of
'free_space' calculation:

*------*----------*----------*
|      | 'rx_cnt' | previous |
*------*----------*----------*
|H -> G|   8.42   |   7.82   |
*------*----------*----------*
|G -> H|   11.6   |   12.1   |
*------*----------*----------*

How many seconds did you run it? How many repetitions? There's a little discrepancy anyway, but I can't tell if it's just noise.


As benchmark 'vsock-iperf' with default arguments was used. There is no
significant performance difference before and after this patch.

Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/linux/virtio_vsock.h            | 1 +
net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 8 +++-----
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Thanks for working on this, I'll do more tests but the approach LGTM.

Thanks,
Stefano


diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_vsock.h b/include/linux/virtio_vsock.h
index c82089dee0c8..3579491c411e 100644
--- a/include/linux/virtio_vsock.h
+++ b/include/linux/virtio_vsock.h
@@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ struct virtio_vsock_sock {
	u32 peer_buf_alloc;

	/* Protected by rx_lock */
+	u32 rx_cnt;
	u32 fwd_cnt;
	u32 last_fwd_cnt;
	u32 rx_bytes;
diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
index 16ff976a86e3..1d4e2328e06e 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
@@ -441,6 +441,7 @@ static bool virtio_transport_inc_rx_pkt(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs,
		return false;

	vvs->rx_bytes += len;
+	vvs->rx_cnt += len;
	return true;
}

@@ -558,7 +559,6 @@ virtio_transport_stream_do_dequeue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
	size_t bytes, total = 0;
	struct sk_buff *skb;
	u32 fwd_cnt_delta;
-	bool low_rx_bytes;
	int err = -EFAULT;
	u32 free_space;

@@ -603,9 +603,7 @@ virtio_transport_stream_do_dequeue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
	}

	fwd_cnt_delta = vvs->fwd_cnt - vvs->last_fwd_cnt;
-	free_space = vvs->buf_alloc - fwd_cnt_delta;
-	low_rx_bytes = (vvs->rx_bytes <
-			sock_rcvlowat(sk_vsock(vsk), 0, INT_MAX));
+	free_space = vvs->buf_alloc - (vvs->rx_cnt - vvs->last_fwd_cnt);

	spin_unlock_bh(&vvs->rx_lock);

@@ -619,7 +617,7 @@ virtio_transport_stream_do_dequeue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
	 * number of bytes in rx queue is not enough to wake up reader.
	 */
	if (fwd_cnt_delta &&
-	    (free_space < VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE || low_rx_bytes))
+	    (free_space < VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE))
		virtio_transport_send_credit_update(vsk);

	return total;
--
2.25.1







[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