lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2] virtio/vsock: allocate multiple skbuffs on tx
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 09:46:10PM +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@sberdevices.ru>
>---
> Link to v1:
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/2c52aa26-8181-d37a-bccd-a86bd3cbc6e1@sberdevices.ru/
>
> 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.
>
> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>index 6564192e7f20..3fdf1433ec28 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 +224,45 @@ 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);
>+
>+ ret = t_ops->send_pkt(skb);
>+
>+ if (ret < 0)
>+ break;
>
>- virtio_transport_inc_tx_pkt(vvs, skb);
>+ rest_len -= skb_len;

t_ops->send_pkt() is returning the number of bytes sent. Current
implementations always return `skb_len`, so there should be no problem,
but it would be better to put a comment here, or we should handle the
case where ret != skb_len to avoid future issues.

>+ } while (rest_len);
>
>- return t_ops->send_pkt(skb);
>+ /* Don't call this function with zero as argument:
>+ * it tries to acquire spinlock and such argument
>+ * makes this call useless.

Good point, can we do the same also for virtio_transport_get_credit()?
(Maybe in a separate patch)

I'm thinking if may be better to do it directly inside the functions,
but I don't have a strong opinion on that since we only call them here.

Thanks,
Stefano

>+ */
>+ if (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;
>+
>+ return ret;
> }
>
> static bool virtio_transport_inc_rx_pkt(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs,
>--
>2.25.1
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-27 01:09    [W:0.046 / U:0.604 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site