Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] vhost: add per-vq worker thread
To:     Vitaly Mayatskih <v.mayatskih@gmail.com>
Cc:     "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20181102160710.3741-1-v.mayatskih@gmail.com>
 <20181102160710.3741-2-v.mayatskih@gmail.com>
 <fe79c7fd-1e9f-dab8-3c65-8151181c922c@redhat.com>
 <CAGF4SLgDk+48aLKHhA_ZgRc6D30tGdnB89b5m5bZKwzyoDb0dQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <617e0c54-7d11-09b6-21e5-968260107872@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 6 Nov 2018 10:48:51 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGF4SLgDk+48aLKHhA_ZgRc6D30tGdnB89b5m5bZKwzyoDb0dQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 2018/11/5 上午11:28, Vitaly Mayatskih wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 9:53 PM Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> I wonder whether or not it's better to allow the device to specific the
>> worker here instead of forcing a per vq worker model. Then we can keep
>> the behavior of exist implementation and do optimization on top?
> I was thinking about that too, but for the sake of simplicity it
> sounds valid that if the user wanted 8 parallel queues for the disk,
> they better be parallel, i.e. worker per queue. The rest of disks that
> don't need high-performance, can have 1 queue specified.
>

If you allow device to specify the worker itself, you can do any kinds 
of mapping bettween work and worker kthread I think. The advantage of 
doing this is that you can keep the vhost-net untouched. This makes 
things a little bit easier and proving two kthreads is better than one 
for -net workload is probably not as easy as it looks. We may get boost 
in some cases but degradation for the rest.


Thanks