netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] vhost: allow multiple workers threads

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: <1329786250.13141.9.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:04:10 -0800
From:	Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...ibm.com>,
	Tom Lendacky <toml@...ibm.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Cristian Viana <vianac@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vhost: allow multiple workers threads

On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 23:00 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> 
> The point was really to avoid scheduler overhead
> as with tcp, tx and rx tend to run on the same cpu.

We have tried different approaches in the past, like splitting vhost
thread to separate TX, RX threads; create per cpu vhost thread instead
of creating per VM per virtio_net vhost thread... 

We think per cpu vhost thread is a better approach based on the data we
have collected. It will reduce both vhost resource and scheduler
overhead. It will not depend on host scheduler, has less various. The
patch is under testing, we hope we can post it soon.

Thanks
Shirley

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html