Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-09-05 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:21:12PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 09/04/2012 09:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 07:34:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 08/31/2012 12:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:36:07AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-09-05 Thread Avi Kivity
On 09/04/2012 09:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 07:34:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: >> On 08/31/2012 12:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:36:07AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: >> >> On 08/30/2012 03:38 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >> >> +st

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-09-04 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 07:34:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 08/31/2012 12:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:36:07AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > >> On 08/30/2012 03:38 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> >> +static unsigned int indirect_alloc_thresh = 16; > >> > Why

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-09-04 Thread Avi Kivity
On 09/04/2012 07:34 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 08/31/2012 12:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:36:07AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: >>> On 08/30/2012 03:38 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> >> +static unsigned int indirect_alloc_thresh = 16; >>> > Why 16? Please make is M

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-09-04 Thread Avi Kivity
On 08/31/2012 12:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:36:07AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: >> On 08/30/2012 03:38 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >> +static unsigned int indirect_alloc_thresh = 16; >> > Why 16? Please make is MAX_SG + 1 this makes some sense. >> >> Wouldn't

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-08-31 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:36:07AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 08/30/2012 03:38 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> +static unsigned int indirect_alloc_thresh = 16; > > Why 16? Please make is MAX_SG + 1 this makes some sense. > > Wouldn't MAX_SG mean we always allocate from the cache? Isn't the

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-08-31 Thread Sasha Levin
On 08/30/2012 03:38 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> +static unsigned int indirect_alloc_thresh = 16; > Why 16? Please make is MAX_SG + 1 this makes some sense. Wouldn't MAX_SG mean we always allocate from the cache? Isn't the memory waste too big in this case? -- To unsubscribe from this list:

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-08-30 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 01:21:58PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > Currently if VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC is enabled we will > use indirect descriptors and allocate them using a simple > kmalloc(). > > This patch adds a cache which will allow indirect buffers under > a configurable size to be alloca

[PATCH v3 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible

2012-08-30 Thread Sasha Levin
Currently if VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC is enabled we will use indirect descriptors and allocate them using a simple kmalloc(). This patch adds a cache which will allow indirect buffers under a configurable size to be allocated from that cache instead. Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- drivers/bl