lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.
Date
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover
>> over 50% of cases and are far clearer.
>>
>> In particular, the scatterlists passed to these functions don't have
>> to be clean (ie. we ignore end markers).
>>
>> FIXME: I'm not sure about the unclean sglist bit. I had a more
>> ambitious one which conditionally ignored end markers in the iterator,
>> but it was ugly and I suspect this is just as fast. Maybe we should
>> just fix all the drivers?
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
>
> Looking at code, it seems that most users really have a single sg, in
> low memory. So how about simply passing void * instead of sg? Whoever
> has multiple sgs can use the rich interface.

Good point, let's do that:
1) Make virtqueue_add_outbuf()/inbuf() take a void * and len.
2) Transfer users across to use that.
3) Make everyone else use clean scatterlists with virtqueue_add_sgs[].
4) Remove virtqueue_add_bufs().

> Long term we might optimize this unrolling some loops, I think
> I saw this giving a small performance gain for -net.

I *think* we could make virtqueue_add() an inline and implement an
virtqueue_add_outsg() wrapper and gcc will eliminate the loops for us.
But not sure it's worth the text bloat...

Cheers,
Rusty.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-25 23:05    [W:0.302 / U:0.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site