| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20120829153833.GE7407@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:38:33 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> To: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com> Cc: rusty@...tcorp.com.au, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, avi@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] virtio-ring: Allocate indirect buffers from cache when possible On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 05:03:03PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 08/29/2012 01:07 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 03:35:00PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > >> On 08/28/2012 03:20 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 03:04:03PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > >>>> Currently if VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC is enabled we will > >>>> use indirect descriptors and allocate them using a simple > >>>> kmalloc(). > >>>> > >>>> This patch adds a cache which will allow indirect buffers under > >>>> a configurable size to be allocated from that cache instead. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com> > >>> > >>> I imagine this helps performance? Any numbers? > >> > >> I ran benchmarks on the original RFC, I've re-tested it now and got similar > >> numbers to the original ones (virtio-net using vhost-net, thresh=16): > >> > >> Before: > >> Recv Send Send > >> Socket Socket Message Elapsed > >> Size Size Size Time Throughput > >> bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > >> > >> 87380 16384 16384 10.00 4512.12 > >> > >> After: > >> Recv Send Send > >> Socket Socket Message Elapsed > >> Size Size Size Time Throughput > >> bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > >> > >> 87380 16384 16384 10.00 5399.18 > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Sasha > > > > This is with both patches 1 + 2? > > Sorry could you please also test what happens if you apply > > - just patch 1 > > - just patch 2 > > > > Thanks! > > Sure thing! > > I've also re-ran it on a IBM server type host instead of my laptop. Here are the > results: > > Vanilla kernel: > > MIGRATED TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.33.1 > () port 0 AF_INET > enable_enobufs failed: getprotobyname > Recv Send Send > Socket Socket Message Elapsed > Size Size Size Time Throughput > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > > 87380 16384 16384 10.00 7922.72 > > Patch 1, with threshold=16: > > MIGRATED TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.33.1 > () port 0 AF_INET > enable_enobufs failed: getprotobyname > Recv Send Send > Socket Socket Message Elapsed > Size Size Size Time Throughput > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > > 87380 16384 16384 10.00 8415.07 > > Patch 2: > > MIGRATED TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.33.1 > () port 0 AF_INET > enable_enobufs failed: getprotobyname > Recv Send Send > Socket Socket Message Elapsed > Size Size Size Time Throughput > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > > 87380 16384 16384 10.00 8931.05 > > > Note that these are simple tests with netperf listening on one end and a simple > 'netperf -H [host]' within the guest. If there are other tests which may be > interesting please let me know. > > > Thanks, > Sasha And which parameter did you use for patch 2? -- 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