[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1284413753.13351.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 14:35:53 -0700
From: Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: xiaohui.xin@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, davem@...emloft.net,
herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au, jdike@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 00/16] Provide a zero-copy method on KVM
virtio-net.
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 13:52 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > When binding vhost thread to cpu3, qemu I/O thread to cpu2, macvtap
> zero
> > copy patch can get 9.4Gb/s.
> >
> > TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to
> 192.168.10.74 (192.168.10.74) port 0 AF_INET : cpu bind
> > Recv Send Send Utilization
> Service Demand
> > Socket Socket Message Elapsed Send Recv Send
> Recv
> > Size Size Size Time Throughput local remote local
> remote
> > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/s % S % S us/KB
> us/KB
> >
> > 87380 16384 65536 60.00 9408.19 55.69 8.45 0.970
> 0.589
> >
> > Shirley
>
> OTOH CPU utilization is up too.
w/i macvtap zero copy patch, the BW can reach link w/i more cpu usage,
w/o macvtap zero copy patch, the BW can't be up to link speed. To
achieve same BW, CPU utilization is lower when using zero copy.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists