vhost_net: use packet weight for rx handler, too
Similar to commit a2ac9990 ("vhost-net: set packet weight of tx polling to 2 * vq size"), we need a packet-based limit for handler_rx, too - elsewhere, under rx flood with small packets, tx can be delayed for a very long time, even without busypolling. The pkt limit applied to handle_rx must be the same applied by handle_tx, or we will get unfair scheduling between rx and tx. Tying such limit to the queue length makes it less effective for large queue length values and can introduce large process scheduler latencies, so a constant valued is used - likewise the existing bytes limit. The selected limit has been validated with PVP[1] performance test with different queue sizes: queue size 256 512 1024 baseline 366 354 362 weight 128 715 723 670 weight 256 740 745 733 weight 512 600 460 583 weight 1024 423 427 418 A packet weight of 256 gives peek performances in under all the tested scenarios. No measurable regression in unidirectional performance tests has been detected. [1] https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2017/06/05/measuring-and-comparing-open-vswitch-performance/Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> CVE-2019-3900 (backported from commit db688c24) [tyhicks: Backport to Xenial: - Context adjustment in call to mutex_lock_nested() in hunk #3 due to missing and unneeded commit aaa3149b ("vhost_net: add missing lock nesting notation") - Context adjustment in call to vhost_log_write() in hunk #4 due to missing and unneeded commit cc5e7107 ("vhost: log dirty page correctly") - Context adjustment in hunk #4 due to using break instead of goto out] Signed-off-by: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@canonical.com> Acked-by: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@canonical.com> Acked-by: Connor Kuehl <connor.kuehl@canonical.com> Signed-off-by: Khalid Elmously <khalid.elmously@canonical.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment