[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1303494773.10632.22.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 10:52:53 -0700
From: Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: mst@...hat.com, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/8] macvtap/vhost TX zero copy support
On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 12:36 -0700, Shirley Ma wrote:
> I am collecting more test results against 2.6.39-rc3 kernel and will
> provide the test matrix later.
Single TCP_STREAM 120 secs test results over ixgbe 10Gb NIC results:
Message BW(Gb/s)qemu-kvm (NumCPU)vhost-net(NumCPU) PerfTop irq/s
4K 7408.57 92.1% 22.6% 1229
4K(Orig)4913.17 118.1% 84.1% 2086
8K 9129.90 89.3% 23.3% 1141
8K(Orig)7094.55 115.9% 84.7% 2157
16K 9178.81 89.1% 23.3% 1139
16K(Orig)8927.1 118.7% 83.4% 2262
64K 9171.43 88.4% 24.9% 1253
64K(Orig)9085.85 115.9% 82.4% 2229
For message size less or equal than 2K, there is a known KVM guest TX
overrun issue. With this zerocopy patch, the issue becomes more severe,
guest io_exits has tripled than before, so the performance is not good.
Once the TX overrun problem has been addressed, I will retest the small
message size performance.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists