Re: vhost net: performance with ping benchmark

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 07:14:29AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/25/2009 05:22 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>
>> I think 2.6.32 is pushing it. 
>
> 2.6.32 is pushing it, but we need to push it.
>
>> I think some time is needed to flush out the userspace interface.  In  
>> particular, I don't think Mark's comments have been adequately  
>> addressed.  If a version were merged without GSO support, some  
>> mechanism to do feature detection would be needed in the userspace API. 
>> 
>
> I don't see any point  in merging without gso (unless it beats userspace  
> with gso, which I don't think will happen).  In any case we'll need  
> feature negotiation.
>
>> I think this is likely going to be needed regardless.  I also think  
>> the tap compatibility suggestion would simplify the consumption of  
>> this in userspace.
>
> What about veth pairs?
>
>> I'd like some time to look at get_state/set_state ioctl()s along with  
>> dirty tracking support.  It's a much better model for live migration  
>> IMHO.
>
> My preference is ring proxying.  Not we'll need ring proxying (or at  
> least event proxying) for non-MSI guests.

Exactly, that's what I meant earlier. That's enough, isn't it, Anthony?

>> I think so more thorough benchmarking would be good too.  In  
>> particular, netperf/iperf runs would be nice.
>
> Definitely.
>
> -- 
> I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
> signature is too narrow to contain.