lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC 0/4] vsock/virtio: optimizations to increase the throughput
On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 02:04:10PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 06:47:15PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 11:52:46AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > I simply love it that you have analysed the individual impact of
> > > each patch! Great job!
> >
> > Thanks! I followed Stefan's suggestions!
> >
> > >
> > > For comparison's sake, it could be IMHO benefitial to add a column
> > > with virtio-net+vhost-net performance.
> > >
> > > This will both give us an idea about whether the vsock layer introduces
> > > inefficiencies, and whether the virtio-net idea has merit.
> > >
> >
> > Sure, I already did TCP tests on virtio-net + vhost, starting qemu in
> > this way:
> > $ qemu-system-x86_64 ... \
> > -netdev tap,id=net0,vhost=on,ifname=tap0,script=no,downscript=no \
> > -device virtio-net-pci,netdev=net0
> >
> > I did also a test using TCP_NODELAY, just to be fair, because VSOCK
> > doesn't implement something like this.
>
> Why not?
>

I think because originally VSOCK was designed to be simple and
low-latency, but of course we can introduce something like that.

Current implementation directly copy the buffer from the user-space in a
virtio_vsock_pkt and enqueue it to be transmitted.

Maybe we can introduce a buffer per socket where accumulate bytes and
send it when it is full or when a timer is fired . We can also introduce
a VSOCK_NODELAY (maybe using the same value of TCP_NODELAY for
compatibility) to send the buffer immediately for low-latency use cases.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Stefano

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-05 09:50    [W:0.061 / U:24.252 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site