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 <[email protected]>
---
Link to v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/[email protected]/

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


_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to