[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52E78416.50000@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 18:19:02 +0800
From: Qin Chuanyu <qinchuanyu@...wei.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: <jasowang@...hat.com>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 8% performance improved by change tap interact with kernel stack
On 2014/1/28 17:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> I think it's okay - IIUC this way we are processing xmit directly
>>> instead of going through softirq.
>>> Was meaning to try this - I'm glad you are looking into this.
>>>
>>> Could you please check latency results?
>>>
>> netperf UDP_RR 512
>> test model: VM->host->host
>>
>> modified before : 11108
>> modified after : 11480
>>
>> 3% gained by this patch
>>
>>
> Nice.
> What about CPU utilization?
> It's trivially easy to speed up networking by
> burning up a lot of CPU so we must make sure it's
> not doing that.
> And I think we should see some tests with TCP as well, and
> try several message sizes.
>
>
Yes, by burning up more CPU we could get better performance easily.
So I have bond vhost thread and interrupt of nic on CPU1 while testing.
modified before, the idle of CPU1 is 0%-1% while testing.
and after modify, the idle of CPU1 is 2%-3% while testing
TCP also could gain from this, but pps is less than UDP, so I think the
improvement would be not so obviously.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists