From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Qin Chuanyu <qinchuanyu@huawei.com>
Cc: jasowang@redhat.com, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>,
KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 8% performance improved by change tap interact with kernel stack
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 09:56:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140129075630.GC23228@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52E8B0A4.6030806@huawei.com>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 03:41:24PM +0800, Qin Chuanyu wrote:
> On 2014/1/28 18:33, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> >>>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.
> >
> >Still need to test this doesn't regress but overall looks convincing to me.
> >Could you send a patch, accompanied by testing results for
> >throughput latency and cpu utilization for tcp and udp
> >with various message sizes?
> >
> >Thanks!
> >
> because of spring festival of china, the test result would be given
> two week later.
> throughput would be test by netperf, and latency would be tested by
> qperf. Is that OK?
For testing - sounds good. Run vmstat in host to check host cpu utilization.
Pls don't forget to address all issues raised in this thread and in
the old one Eric mentioned:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/52963/
either address in code or address in commit log why it doesn't apply
anymore.
--
MST
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-29 7:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-28 8:14 8% performance improved by change tap interact with kernel stack Qin Chuanyu
2014-01-28 8:34 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-28 9:14 ` Qin Chuanyu
2014-01-28 9:41 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-28 10:19 ` Qin Chuanyu
2014-01-28 10:33 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-28 16:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
2014-01-28 17:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-29 7:41 ` Qin Chuanyu
2014-01-29 7:56 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2014-01-28 16:56 ` Rick Jones
2014-01-28 14:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-01-29 7:12 ` Qin Chuanyu
2014-02-11 13:21 ` Qin Chuanyu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140129075630.GC23228@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qinchuanyu@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.