mirror of
https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers.git
synced 2025-07-01 17:52:40 +00:00
Merge pull request #945 from fidencio/wip/virtiofs-performance-improvements-backport-and-default-settings
VirtioFS: backports & default settings to improve performance
This commit is contained in:
Peng Tao
GitHub
commit
5f47f224ff
@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ DEFVIRTIOFSCACHE ?= auto
|
||||
#
|
||||
# see `virtiofsd -h` for possible options.
|
||||
# Make sure you quote args.
|
||||
DEFVIRTIOFSEXTRAARGS ?= []
|
||||
DEFVIRTIOFSEXTRAARGS ?= [\"--thread-pool-size=1\"]
|
||||
DEFENABLEIOTHREADS := false
|
||||
DEFENABLEMEMPREALLOC := false
|
||||
DEFENABLEHUGEPAGES := false
|
||||
|
||||
@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
|
||||
From 04d325e86f79bd61f8fd50d45ff795aca0dd3404 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
|
||||
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
|
||||
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 17:32:16 -0400
|
||||
Subject: [PATCH] virtiofsd: Used glib "shared" thread pool
|
||||
|
||||
glib offers thread pools and it seems to support "exclusive" and "shared"
|
||||
thread pools.
|
||||
|
||||
https://developer.gnome.org/glib/stable/glib-Thread-Pools.html#g-thread-pool-new
|
||||
|
||||
Currently we use "exlusive" thread pools but its performance seems to be
|
||||
poor. I tried using "shared" thread pools and performance seems much
|
||||
better. I posted performance results here.
|
||||
|
||||
https://www.redhat.com/archives/virtio-fs/2020-September/msg00080.html
|
||||
|
||||
So lets switch to shared thread pools. We can think of making it optional
|
||||
once somebody can show in what cases exclusive thread pools offer better
|
||||
results. For now, my simple performance tests across the board see
|
||||
better results with shared thread pools.
|
||||
|
||||
Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
|
||||
Message-Id: <20200921213216.GE13362@redhat.com>
|
||||
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
|
||||
Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert@redhat.com>
|
||||
With seccomp fix from Miklos
|
||||
---
|
||||
tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c | 2 +-
|
||||
tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c | 2 ++
|
||||
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
|
||||
|
||||
diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
|
||||
index 9e5537506c..d5c8e98253 100644
|
||||
--- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
|
||||
+++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
|
||||
@@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ static void *fv_queue_thread(void *opaque)
|
||||
struct fuse_session *se = qi->virtio_dev->se;
|
||||
GThreadPool *pool;
|
||||
|
||||
- pool = g_thread_pool_new(fv_queue_worker, qi, se->thread_pool_size, TRUE,
|
||||
+ pool = g_thread_pool_new(fv_queue_worker, qi, se->thread_pool_size, FALSE,
|
||||
NULL);
|
||||
if (!pool) {
|
||||
fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "%s: g_thread_pool_new failed\n", __func__);
|
||||
diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c b/tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c
|
||||
index 19fee60011..eb9af8265f 100644
|
||||
--- a/tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c
|
||||
+++ b/tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c
|
||||
@@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ static const int syscall_whitelist[] = {
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(rt_sigaction),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(rt_sigprocmask),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(rt_sigreturn),
|
||||
+ SCMP_SYS(sched_getattr),
|
||||
+ SCMP_SYS(sched_setattr),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(sendmsg),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(setresgid),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(setresuid),
|
||||
--
|
||||
2.28.0
|
||||
|
||||
@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
|
||||
From 04d325e86f79bd61f8fd50d45ff795aca0dd3404 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
|
||||
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
|
||||
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 17:32:16 -0400
|
||||
Subject: [PATCH] virtiofsd: Used glib "shared" thread pool
|
||||
|
||||
glib offers thread pools and it seems to support "exclusive" and "shared"
|
||||
thread pools.
|
||||
|
||||
https://developer.gnome.org/glib/stable/glib-Thread-Pools.html#g-thread-pool-new
|
||||
|
||||
Currently we use "exlusive" thread pools but its performance seems to be
|
||||
poor. I tried using "shared" thread pools and performance seems much
|
||||
better. I posted performance results here.
|
||||
|
||||
https://www.redhat.com/archives/virtio-fs/2020-September/msg00080.html
|
||||
|
||||
So lets switch to shared thread pools. We can think of making it optional
|
||||
once somebody can show in what cases exclusive thread pools offer better
|
||||
results. For now, my simple performance tests across the board see
|
||||
better results with shared thread pools.
|
||||
|
||||
Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
|
||||
Message-Id: <20200921213216.GE13362@redhat.com>
|
||||
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
|
||||
Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert@redhat.com>
|
||||
With seccomp fix from Miklos
|
||||
---
|
||||
tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c | 2 +-
|
||||
tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c | 2 ++
|
||||
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
|
||||
|
||||
diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
|
||||
index 9e5537506c..d5c8e98253 100644
|
||||
--- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
|
||||
+++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
|
||||
@@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ static void *fv_queue_thread(void *opaque)
|
||||
struct fuse_session *se = qi->virtio_dev->se;
|
||||
GThreadPool *pool;
|
||||
|
||||
- pool = g_thread_pool_new(fv_queue_worker, qi, se->thread_pool_size, TRUE,
|
||||
+ pool = g_thread_pool_new(fv_queue_worker, qi, se->thread_pool_size, FALSE,
|
||||
NULL);
|
||||
if (!pool) {
|
||||
fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "%s: g_thread_pool_new failed\n", __func__);
|
||||
diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c b/tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c
|
||||
index 19fee60011..eb9af8265f 100644
|
||||
--- a/tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c
|
||||
+++ b/tools/virtiofsd/seccomp.c
|
||||
@@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ static const int syscall_whitelist[] = {
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(rt_sigaction),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(rt_sigprocmask),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(rt_sigreturn),
|
||||
+ SCMP_SYS(sched_getattr),
|
||||
+ SCMP_SYS(sched_setattr),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(sendmsg),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(setresgid),
|
||||
SCMP_SYS(setresuid),
|
||||
--
|
||||
2.28.0
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user