Re: pserialize & hw interrupt

[Ryota Ozaki <ozaki-r%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Masao Uebayashi <uebayasi%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
> I see that vioif(4) schedules another softint from within
> vioif_rx_vq_done(), that would latency a bit longer.

Good point. If I directly call vioif_rx_softint, the performance
improves regardless of softint-ed interrupts on/off. The two
performance are almost same and better than the vanilla.

In the case of softint-ed interrupts on, I think we can safely
remove the indirection. OTOH, in the case of off, I'm not sure
we can do the same thing.

>
>> +#define VIRTIO_F_PCI_INTR_SOFTINT (2 << 0)
>
> Usually (1 << 1).

Oops. You're right. Fixed.

  ozaki-r