linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v8 00/16] Provide a zero-copy method on KVM virtio-net.

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1280442682.9058.15.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:31:22 -0700
From:	Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
To:	xiaohui.xin@...el.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mst@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	davem@...emloft.net, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	jdike@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v8 00/16] Provide a zero-copy method on KVM
 virtio-net.

Hello Xiaohui,

On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 19:14 +0800, xiaohui.xin@...el.com wrote:
> The idea is simple, just to pin the guest VM user space and then
> let host NIC driver has the chance to directly DMA to it. 
> The patches are based on vhost-net backend driver. We add a device
> which provides proto_ops as sendmsg/recvmsg to vhost-net to
> send/recv directly to/from the NIC driver. KVM guest who use the
> vhost-net backend may bind any ethX interface in the host side to
> get copyless data transfer thru guest virtio-net frontend.

Since vhost-net already supports macvtap/tun backends, do you think
whether it's better to implement zero copy in macvtap/tun than inducing
a new media passthrough device here? 

> Our goal is to improve the bandwidth and reduce the CPU usage.
> Exact performance data will be provided later.

I did some vhost performance measurement over 10Gb ixgbe, and found that
in order to get consistent BW results, netperf/netserver, qemu, vhost
threads smp affinities are required.

Looking forward to these results for small message size comparison. For
large message size 10Gb ixgbe BW already reached by doing vhost smp
affinity w/i offloading support, we will see how much CPU utilization it
can be reduced. 

Please provide latency results as well. I did some experimental on
macvtap zero copy sendmsg, what I have found that get_user_pages latency
pretty high.

Thanks
Shirley

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/