lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 18:19:02 +0800 From: Qin Chuanyu <qinchuanyu@...wei.com> To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> CC: <jasowang@...hat.com>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>, KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: 8% performance improved by change tap interact with kernel stack On 2014/1/28 17:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> I think it's okay - IIUC this way we are processing xmit directly >>> instead of going through softirq. >>> Was meaning to try this - I'm glad you are looking into this. >>> >>> Could you please check latency results? >>> >> netperf UDP_RR 512 >> test model: VM->host->host >> >> modified before : 11108 >> modified after : 11480 >> >> 3% gained by this patch >> >> > Nice. > What about CPU utilization? > It's trivially easy to speed up networking by > burning up a lot of CPU so we must make sure it's > not doing that. > And I think we should see some tests with TCP as well, and > try several message sizes. > > Yes, by burning up more CPU we could get better performance easily. So I have bond vhost thread and interrupt of nic on CPU1 while testing. modified before, the idle of CPU1 is 0%-1% while testing. and after modify, the idle of CPU1 is 2%-3% while testing TCP also could gain from this, but pps is less than UDP, so I think the improvement would be not so obviously. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists