Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1621902
| From | Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] ptr_ring: batch ring zeroing |
| Date | 2017-04-12 10:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvlvI-24R-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <ttv69-31Q-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 2017年04月07日 13:49, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > A known weakness in ptr_ring design is that it does not handle well the > situation when ring is almost full: as entries are consumed they are > immediately used again by the producer, so consumer and producer are > writing to a shared cache line. > > To fix this, add batching to consume calls: as entries are > consumed do not write NULL into the ring until we get > a multiple (in current implementation 2x) of cache lines > away from the producer. At that point, write them all out. > > We do the write out in the reverse order to keep > producer from sharing cache with consumer for as long > as possible. > > Writeout also triggers when ring wraps around - there's > no special reason to do this but it helps keep the code > a bit simpler. > > What should we do if getting away from producer by 2 cache lines > would mean we are keeping the ring moe than half empty? > Maybe we should reduce the batching in this case, > current patch simply reduces the batching. > > Notes: > - it is no longer true that a call to consume guarantees > that the following call to produce will succeed. > No users seem to assume that. > - batching can also in theory reduce the signalling rate: > users that would previously send interrups to the producer > to wake it up after consuming each entry would now only > need to do this once in a batch. > Doing this would be easy by returning a flag to the caller. > No users seem to do signalling on consume yet so this was not > implemented yet. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin<mst@redhat.com> > --- > > Jason, I am curious whether the following gives you some of > the performance boost that you see with vhost batching > patches. Is vhost batching on top still helpful? The patch looks good to me, will have a test for vhost batching patches. Thanks
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 1/3] ptr_ring: batch ring zeroing Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-04-12 10:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] ptr_ring: batch ring zeroing Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-04-14 10:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] ptr_ring: batch ring zeroing "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> - 2017-04-14 23:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] ptr_ring: batch ring zeroing Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-04-18 04:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] ptr_ring: batch ring zeroing "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> - 2017-04-15 01:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] ptr_ring: batch ring zeroing Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-04-18 04:20 +0200
csiph-web