vhost net: performance with ping benchmark
Michael S. Tsirkin
mst at redhat.com
Tue Aug 25 07:02:34 PDT 2009
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 08:06:39AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> What about veth pairs?
>
> Does veth support GSO and checksum offload?
AFAIK, no. But again, improving veth is a separate project :)
>>> 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.
>>
>> My preference is ring proxying. Not we'll need ring proxying (or at
>> least event proxying) for non-MSI guests.
>
> I avoided suggested ring proxying because I didn't want to suggest that
> merging should be contingent on it.
Happily, the proposed interface supports is.
> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori
More information about the Virtualization
mailing list