From: Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
To: Joyce Kong <joyce.kong@arm.com>
Cc: maxime.coquelin@redhat.com, stephen@networkplumber.org,
tiwei.bie@intel.com, zhihong.wang@intel.com, thomas@monjalon.net,
jerinj@marvell.com, yinan.wang@intel.com,
honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com, gavin.hu@arm.com, nd@arm.com,
dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring used idx
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:51:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200417065145.GA57965@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200406152634.606-2-joyce.kong@arm.com>
On 04/06, Joyce Kong wrote:
>In case VIRTIO_F_ORDER_PLATFORM(36) is not negotiated, then the frontend
>and backend are assumed to be implemented in software, that is they can
>run on identical CPUs in an SMP configuration.
>Thus a weak form of memory barriers like rte_smp_r/wmb, other than
>rte_cio_r/wmb, is sufficient for this case(vq->hw->weak_barriers == 1)
>and yields better performance.
>For the above case, this patch helps yielding even better performance
>by replacing the two-way barriers with C11 one-way barriers for used
>index in split ring.
>
>Signed-off-by: Joyce Kong <joyce.kong@arm.com>
>Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
>---
> drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ethdev.c | 9 ++--
> drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ring.h | 2 +-
> drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c | 46 +++++++++----------
> drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple_neon.c | 5 +-
> drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple_sse.c | 5 +-
> .../net/virtio/virtio_user/virtio_user_dev.c | 8 ++--
> drivers/net/virtio/virtqueue.c | 2 +-
> drivers/net/virtio/virtqueue.h | 37 ++++++++++++---
> lib/librte_vhost/virtio_net.c | 5 +-
> 9 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ethdev.c
>index f9d0ea70d..a4a865bfa 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ethdev.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ethdev.c
>@@ -285,13 +285,12 @@ virtio_send_command_split(struct virtnet_ctl *cvq,
>
> virtqueue_notify(vq);
>
>- rte_rmb();
>- while (VIRTQUEUE_NUSED(vq) == 0) {
>- rte_rmb();
>+ /* virtqueue_nused has a load-acquire or rte_cio_rmb inside */
>+ while (virtqueue_nused(vq) == 0)
> usleep(100);
>- }
>
>- while (VIRTQUEUE_NUSED(vq)) {
>+ /* virtqueue_nused has a load-acquire or rte_cio_rmb inside */
>+ while (virtqueue_nused(vq)) {
> uint32_t idx, desc_idx, used_idx;
> struct vring_used_elem *uep;
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ring.h b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ring.h
>index 7ba34662e..0f6574f68 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ring.h
>+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ring.h
>@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ struct vring_used_elem {
>
> struct vring_used {
> uint16_t flags;
>- volatile uint16_t idx;
>+ uint16_t idx;
> struct vring_used_elem ring[0];
> };
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
>index 752faa0f6..9ba26fd95 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
>@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ virtio_dev_rx_queue_done(void *rxq, uint16_t offset)
> struct virtnet_rx *rxvq = rxq;
> struct virtqueue *vq = rxvq->vq;
>
>- return VIRTQUEUE_NUSED(vq) >= offset;
>+ return virtqueue_nused(vq) >= offset;
> }
>
> void
>@@ -1243,9 +1243,8 @@ virtio_recv_pkts(void *rx_queue, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts, uint16_t nb_pkts)
> if (unlikely(hw->started == 0))
> return nb_rx;
>
>- nb_used = VIRTQUEUE_NUSED(vq);
>-
>- virtio_rmb(hw->weak_barriers);
>+ /* virtqueue_nused has a load-acquire or rte_cio_rmb inside */
Small nit, I don't think we need to add this comment to every occurrence of
virtqueue_nused, what about moving it to the definition of this function?
Thanks,
Xiaolong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-17 6:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-12 9:24 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/2] one way barrier for split vring idx Joyce Kong
2020-02-12 9:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring used idx Joyce Kong
2020-02-12 9:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring avail idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-02 2:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] one way barrier for split vring idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-02 2:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring used idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-02 15:47 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-03 8:55 ` Gavin Hu
2020-04-16 4:40 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-16 6:46 ` Joyce Kong
2020-04-02 2:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring avail idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-06 15:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] one way barrier for split vring idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-16 9:08 ` Ye Xiaolong
2020-04-06 15:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring used idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-17 6:51 ` Ye Xiaolong [this message]
2020-04-17 8:14 ` Joyce Kong
2020-04-06 15:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring avail idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-24 3:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/2] one way barrier for split vring idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-28 16:06 ` Maxime Coquelin
2020-04-29 17:45 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-30 9:09 ` Maxime Coquelin
2020-04-30 9:16 ` Joyce Kong
2020-04-30 9:24 ` Maxime Coquelin
2020-04-24 3:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring used idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-27 9:03 ` Maxime Coquelin
2020-04-24 3:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring avail idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-27 9:03 ` Maxime Coquelin
2020-04-30 9:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/2] one way barrier for split vring idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-30 20:54 ` Maxime Coquelin
2020-04-30 9:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring used idx Joyce Kong
2020-04-30 22:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-04 10:04 ` Maxime Coquelin
2020-04-30 9:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/2] virtio: one way barrier for split vring avail idx Joyce Kong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200417065145.GA57965@intel.com \
--to=xiaolong.ye@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gavin.hu@arm.com \
--cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=joyce.kong@arm.com \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=tiwei.bie@intel.com \
--cc=yinan.wang@intel.com \
--cc=zhihong.wang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).