[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQKs6Y-47TuxFedT2Xi6OUAJqwGFKhip40cbVewmtw10wQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:43:06 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@...hat.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, mst@...hat.com,
dgibson@...hat.com, Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Vladislav Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>,
Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>,
wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com.pnq.redhat.com,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>, bhutchings@...arflare.com,
xii@...gle.com, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
Jiří Pírko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-net 0/4] Increase the limit of tuntap queues
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@...hat.com> wrote:
> Networking under KVM works best if we allocate a per-vCPU rx and tx
> queue in a virtual NIC. This requires a per-vCPU queue on the host side.
...
> I have done some testing to find out any regression and with sample program
> which creates tun/tap for single queue / multiqueue device and it seems to be
> working fine. I will also post the performance numbers.
Sounds quite exciting.
please share recommended setup (queue assignments) and
performance gains you're seeing.
--
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