On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 04:42:48PM +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote: > This gives small but noticeable rx performance improvement (2-3%) > and will allow exploiting future napi improvement. > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pab...@redhat.com>
I am not sure this is necessarily worth doing for this dumb hardware. I queued v1 in vhost tree for now, let's see some performance numbers before we start changing about other paths. > -- > v2: replace also netdev_alloc_skb_ip_align() invocation in > add_recvbuf_small(), suggested by Venkatesh Srinivas > --- > drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c > index fb0eae4..100e039 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c > @@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *page_to_skb(struct virtnet_info > *vi, > p = page_address(page) + offset; > > /* copy small packet so we can reuse these pages for small data */ > - skb = netdev_alloc_skb_ip_align(vi->dev, GOOD_COPY_LEN); > + skb = napi_alloc_skb(&rq->napi, GOOD_COPY_LEN); > if (unlikely(!skb)) > return NULL; > > @@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ static int add_recvbuf_small(struct virtnet_info *vi, > struct receive_queue *rq, > struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf *hdr; > int err; > > - skb = __netdev_alloc_skb_ip_align(vi->dev, GOOD_PACKET_LEN, gfp); > + skb = __napi_alloc_skb(&rq->napi, GOOD_PACKET_LEN, gfp); > if (unlikely(!skb)) > return -ENOMEM; > > -- > 1.8.3.1
