netdev - Re: [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4B2FA655.6030205@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 21 Dec 2009 11:46:13 -0500
From:	Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>
To:	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
CC:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33

On 12/21/09 11:37 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 12/21/2009 10:04 AM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>> No, B and C definitely are, but A is lacking.  And the performance
>> suffers as a result in my testing (vhost-net still throws a ton of exits
>> as its limited by virtio-pci and only adds about 1Gb/s to virtio-u, far
>> behind venet even with things like zero-copy turned off).
>>    
> 
> How does virtio-pci limit vhost-net?  The only time exits should occur
> are when the guest notifies the host that something has been placed on
> the ring.  Since vhost-net has no tx mitigation scheme right now, the
> result may be that it's taking an io exit on every single packet but
> this is orthogonal to virtio-pci.
> 
> Since virtio-pci supports MSI-X, there should be no IO exits on
> host->guest notification other than EOI in the virtual APIC.

The very best you can hope to achieve is 1:1 EOI per signal (though
today virtio-pci is even worse than that).  As I indicated above, I can
eliminate more than 50% of even the EOIs in trivial examples, and even
more as we scale up the number of devices or the IO load (or both).

> This is a
> light weight exit today and will likely disappear entirely with newer
> hardware.

By that argument, this is all moot.  New hardware will likely obsolete
the need for venet or virtio-net anyway.  The goal of my work is to
provide an easy to use framework for maximizing the IO transport _in
lieu_ of hardware acceleration.  Software will always be leading here,
so we don't want to get into a pattern of waiting for new hardware to
cover poor software engineering.  Its simply not necessary in most
cases.  A little smart software design and a framework that allows it to
be easily exploited/reused is the best step forward, IMO.

Kind Regards,
-Greg

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (268 bytes)