On 3/7/2016 4:36 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 07:52:22AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote: >> On 2/18/2016 9:48 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: >>> Current virtio_dev_merge_rx() implementation just looks like the >>> old rte_vhost_dequeue_burst(), full of twisted logic, that you >>> can see same code block in quite many different places. >>> >>> However, the logic of virtio_dev_merge_rx() is quite similar to >>> virtio_dev_rx(). The big difference is that the mergeable one >>> could allocate more than one available entries to hold the data. >>> Fetching all available entries to vec_buf at once makes the >> [...] >>> - } >>> +static inline uint32_t __attribute__((always_inline)) >>> +copy_mbuf_to_desc_mergeable(struct virtio_net *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue >>> *vq, >>> + uint16_t res_start_idx, uint16_t res_end_idx, >>> + struct rte_mbuf *m) >>> +{ >>> + struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf virtio_hdr = {{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 0}; >>> + uint32_t vec_idx = 0; >>> + uint16_t cur_idx = res_start_idx; >>> + uint64_t desc_addr; >>> + uint32_t mbuf_offset, mbuf_avail; >>> + uint32_t desc_offset, desc_avail; >>> + uint32_t cpy_len; >>> + uint16_t desc_idx, used_idx; >>> + uint32_t nr_used = 0; >>> >>> - cpy_len = RTE_MIN(vb_avail, seg_avail); >>> + if (m == NULL) >>> + return 0; >> Is this inherited from old code? > Yes. > >> Let us remove the unnecessary check. >> Caller ensures it is not NULL. > ... >>> + desc_avail = vq->buf_vec[vec_idx].buf_len - vq->vhost_hlen; >>> + desc_offset = vq->vhost_hlen; >> As we know we are in merge-able path, use sizeof(virtio_net_hdr) to save >> one load for the header len. > Please, it's a refactor patch series. You have mentioned quite many > trivial issues here and there, which I don't care too much and I don't > think they would matter somehow. In addition, they are actually from > the old code.
For normal code, it would be better using vq->vhost_hlen for example for future compatibility. For DPDK, we don't waste cycles whenever possible, especially vhost is the centralized bottleneck. For the check of m == NULL, it should be removed, which not only occupies unnecessary branch predication resource but also causes confusion for return nr_used from copy_mbuf_to_desc_mergeable. It is OK if you don't want to fix this in this patchset. >>> + >>> + mbuf_avail = rte_pktmbuf_data_len(m); >>> + mbuf_offset = 0; >>> + while (1) { >>> + /* done with current desc buf, get the next one */ >>> + >> [...] >>> + if (reserve_avail_buf_mergeable(vq, pkt_len, &start, &end) < 0) >>> + break; >>> >>> + nr_used = copy_mbuf_to_desc_mergeable(dev, vq, start, end, >>> + pkts[pkt_idx]); >> In which case couldn't we get nr_used from start and end? > When pkts[pkt_idx] is NULL, though you suggest to remove it, the check > is here. > > --yliu >