On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:32:12PM +0800, Tan, Jianfeng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just out of interest, seems that the message handling thread which runs
> new_device() is pthread_create() from the thread which calls the
> dev_start(), usually master thread, right? But it's not necessary to be the
> master thread to poll pkts from this vhost port, right? So what's the
> significance to record the numa_node information of message handling thread
> here? Shall we make the decision of numa_realloc based on the final PMD
> thread who is responsible for polling this vhost port?
It doesn't matter on which core we made the decision: the result
would be same since we are querying the numa node info of the
virtio_net dev struct.
--yliu
>
> It's not related to this patch itself. And it seems good to me.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Jianfeng
>
>
>
> On 4/6/2016 12:09 AM, Ciara Loftus wrote:
> >After some testing, it was found that retrieving numa information
> >about a vhost device via a call to get_mempolicy is more
> >accurate when performed during the new_device callback versus
> >the vring_state_changed callback, in particular upon initial boot
> >of the VM. Performing this check during new_device is also
> >potentially more efficient as this callback is only triggered once
> >during device initialisation, compared with vring_state_changed
> >which may be called multiple times depending on the number of
> >queues assigned to the device.
> >
> >Reorganise the code to perform this check and assign the correct
> >socket_id to the device during the new_device callback.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Ciara Loftus <ciara.loftus at intel.com>
> >---
> > drivers/net/vhost/rte_eth_vhost.c | 28 ++++++++++++++--------------
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/net/vhost/rte_eth_vhost.c
> >b/drivers/net/vhost/rte_eth_vhost.c
> >index 4cc6bec..b1eb082 100644
> >--- a/drivers/net/vhost/rte_eth_vhost.c
> >+++ b/drivers/net/vhost/rte_eth_vhost.c
> >@@ -229,6 +229,9 @@ new_device(struct virtio_net *dev)
> > struct pmd_internal *internal;
> > struct vhost_queue *vq;
> > unsigned i;
> >+#ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_VHOST_NUMA
> >+ int newnode, ret;
> >+#endif
> > if (dev == NULL) {
> > RTE_LOG(INFO, PMD, "Invalid argument\n");
> >@@ -244,6 +247,17 @@ new_device(struct virtio_net *dev)
> > eth_dev = list->eth_dev;
> > internal = eth_dev->data->dev_private;
> >+#ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_VHOST_NUMA
> >+ ret = get_mempolicy(&newnode, NULL, 0, dev,
> >+ MPOL_F_NODE | MPOL_F_ADDR);
> >+ if (ret < 0) {
> >+ RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, "Unknown numa node\n");
> >+ return -1;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ eth_dev->data->numa_node = newnode;
> >+#endif
> >+
> > for (i = 0; i < eth_dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++) {
> > vq = eth_dev->data->rx_queues[i];
> > if (vq == NULL)
> >@@ -352,9 +366,6 @@ vring_state_changed(struct virtio_net *dev, uint16_t
> >vring, int enable)
> > struct rte_vhost_vring_state *state;
> > struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev;
> > struct internal_list *list;
> >-#ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_VHOST_NUMA
> >- int newnode, ret;
> >-#endif
> > if (dev == NULL) {
> > RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, "Invalid argument\n");
> >@@ -370,17 +381,6 @@ vring_state_changed(struct virtio_net *dev, uint16_t
> >vring, int enable)
> > eth_dev = list->eth_dev;
> > /* won't be NULL */
> > state = vring_states[eth_dev->data->port_id];
> >-
> >-#ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_VHOST_NUMA
> >- ret = get_mempolicy(&newnode, NULL, 0, dev,
> >- MPOL_F_NODE | MPOL_F_ADDR);
> >- if (ret < 0) {
> >- RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD, "Unknown numa node\n");
> >- return -1;
> >- }
> >-
> >- eth_dev->data->numa_node = newnode;
> >-#endif
> > rte_spinlock_lock(&state->lock);
> > state->cur[vring] = enable;
> > state->max_vring = RTE_MAX(vring, state->max_vring);
