[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] xen/netback: implements persistent grant with one page pool.
On 2012-11-16 17:32, Ian Campbell wrote: On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 02:49 +0000, ANNIE LI wrote:Take a look at the following functions from blkback; foreach_grant, add_persistent_gnt and get_persistent_gnt. They are generic functions to deal with persistent grants.Ok, thanks. Or moving those functions into a separate common file?Please put them somewhere common. Ok. This is highly inefficient, one of the points of using gnttab_set_map_op is that you can queue a bunch of grants, and then map them at the same time using gnttab_map_refs, but here you are using it to map a single grant at a time. You should instead see how much grants you need to map to complete the request and map them all at the same time.Yes, it is inefficient here. But this is limited by current netback implementation. Current netback is not per-VIF based(not like blkback does). After combining persistent grant and non persistent grant together, every vif request in the queue may/may not support persistent grant. I have to judge whether every vif in the queue supports persistent grant or not. If it support, memcpy is used, if not, grantcopy is used.You could (and should) still batch all the grant copies into one hypercall, e.g. walk the list either doing memcpy or queuing up copyops as appropriate, then at the end if the queue is non-zero length issue the hypercall. This still connects with netback per-VIF implementation. I'd expect this lack of batching here and in the other case I just spotted to have a detrimental affect on guests running with this patch but not using persistent grants. Did you benchmark that case? I did some test before. But I'd better to create more detailed result under in different case. After making netback per-VIF works, this issue can be fixed.You've mentioned improvements which are conditional on this work a few times I think, perhaps it makes sense to make that change first? Yes, I did consider to implement per-VIF first before persistent grant. But thinking of it is part of wei's patch and combined with other patches, and decided to implement it later. But making the change first would make things more clear. Thanks Annie Ian. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message tomajordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info athttp://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |