[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] virtio-blk: add iothread-vq-mapping parameter
From: |
Kevin Wolf |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] virtio-blk: add iothread-vq-mapping parameter |
Date: |
Thu, 21 Dec 2023 22:07:21 +0100 |
Am 20.12.2023 um 14:47 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
> v4:
> - Use DummyVirtioForceArrays naming in QAPI schema [Markus]
> v3:
> - Rebased onto Kevin's block branch
> - Add StringOutputVisitor "<omitted>" patch to fix "info qtree" crash
> - Fix QAPI schema formatting [Markus]
> - Eliminate unnecessary local variable in get_iothread_vq_mapping_list()
> [Markus]
>
> virtio-blk and virtio-scsi devices need a way to specify the mapping between
> IOThreads and virtqueues. At the moment all virtqueues are assigned to a
> single
> IOThread or the main loop. This single thread can be a CPU bottleneck, so it
> is
> necessary to allow finer-grained assignment to spread the load. With this
> series applied, "pidstat -t 1" shows that guests with -smp 2 or higher are
> able
> to exploit multiple IOThreads.
>
> This series introduces command-line syntax for the new iothread-vq-mapping
> property is as follows:
>
> --device
> '{"driver":"virtio-blk-pci","iothread-vq-mapping":[{"iothread":"iothread0","vqs":[0,1,2]},...]},...'
>
> IOThreads are specified by name and virtqueues are specified by 0-based
> index.
>
> It will be common to simply assign virtqueues round-robin across a set
> of IOThreads. A convenient syntax that does not require specifying
> individual virtqueue indices is available:
>
> --device
> '{"driver":"virtio-blk-pci","iothread-vq-mapping":[{"iothread":"iothread0"},{"iothread":"iothread1"},...]},...'
>
> There is no way to reassign virtqueues at runtime and I expect that to be a
> very rare requirement.
>
> Note that JSON --device syntax is required for the iothread-vq-mapping
> parameter because it's non-scalar.
>
> Based-on: 81e69329d6a4018f4b37d15b6fc845fbe585a93b
> (https://repo.or.cz/qemu/kevin.git block)
Thanks, applied to the block branch. We agreed off-list that the
remaining problems can be fixed in follow-up patches.
Kevin