From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EPH0P-0006gn-Fc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 06:05:09 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EPH0N-0006ga-Br for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 06:05:08 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EPH0M-0006gX-RK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 06:05:07 -0400 Received: from [212.227.126.183] (helo=moutng.kundenserver.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1EPH0M-0007aI-HT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 06:05:06 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smartserver.sbits.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C801FA62B for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 12:05:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smartserver.sbits.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA36DFA62C for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 12:05:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smartserver.sbits.int ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smartserver [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18877-08 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 12:05:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.49.200] (unknown [192.168.49.200]) by smartserver.sbits.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB45FA62B for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 12:05:03 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <434B8E4B.4090008@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 12:04:59 +0200 From: Lars Bakker MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Network Performance between Win Host and Linux Guest Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Hello! Did you find out why qemu's networking is so slow? Is that a general issue or is it just happening when running qemu on windows? What has actually been changed in version 0.7.2? (The changelog says that improvements were made in user-mode-networking) > I guess the best way is to understand why the network is so slow. > This is a bug in SLIRP ou the NE2000 emulated card, not > > something > due to the CPU emulation itself. I saw some patches that add support for other NICs in qemu. Did anyone experience an improvement in network performance when using these patches? Sorry for asking so many questions, but I would really like to use qemu. Network performance is quite important to me and I don't like the idea of using another hard disk image to access data from the host system, because you cannot use it while qemu is running. If someone gave me a hint on where to look to solve this problem, I would be very grateful and I would certainly try to help. Regards, Lars