vhost net: performance with ping benchmark
Anthony Liguori
anthony at codemonkey.ws
Mon Aug 24 19:22:47 PDT 2009
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:12:41AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
>> At Rusty's suggestion, I tested vhost base performance with ping.
>> Results below, and seem to be what you'd expect.
>>
>
> Rusty, any chance you could look at the code? Is it in reasonable
> shape? I think it makes sense to merge it through you. What do you
> think? One comment on file placement: I put files under a separate
> vhost directory to avoid confusion with virtio-net which runs in guest.
> Does this sound sane? Also, can a minimal version (without TSO, tap or
> any other features) be merged upstream first so that features can be
> added later? Or do we have to wait until it's more full featured?
> Finally, can it reasonably make 2.6.32, or you think it needs more time
> out of tree?
>
I think 2.6.32 is pushing it. I think some time is needed to flush out
the userspace interface. In particular, I don't think Mark's comments
have been adequately addressed. If a version were merged without GSO
support, some mechanism to do feature detection would be needed in the
userspace API. I think this is likely going to be needed regardless. I
also think the tap compatibility suggestion would simplify the
consumption of this in userspace.
I'd like some time to look at get_state/set_state ioctl()s along with
dirty tracking support. It's a much better model for live migration IMHO.
I think so more thorough benchmarking would be good too. In particular,
netperf/iperf runs would be nice.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
> Thanks very much,
>
>
More information about the Virtualization
mailing list