[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53110A62.7070109@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 17:14:58 -0500
From: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: macvtap performance regression (bisected) between 3.13 and 3.14-rc1
On 02/27/2014 03:52 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Vlad,
>
> commit 6acf54f1cf0a6747bac9fea26f34cfc5a9029523
> macvtap: Add support of packet capture on macvtap device.
>
> causes a performance regression for iperf traffic between two KVM guests
> on my s390 system. Both guests are connected via two macvtaps on the same OSA
> network card.
> Before that patch I get ~20 Gbit/sec between two guests, afterwards I get
> ~4Gbit/sec
>
> Latency seems to be unchanges (uperf 1byte ping pong).
>
> According to ifconfig in the guest, I have ~ 1500 bytes per packet with this
> patch and ~ 40000 bytes without. So for some reason this patch causes the
> network stack to do segmentation. (the guest kernel stays the same, only host
> kernel is changed).
>
> Any ideas?
I am looking. It shouldn't cause addition segmentations and when I ran
netperf on the code I didn't see any difference in the throughput.
-vlad
>
>
> Christian
>
--
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