Re: Network performance regression between kvm-29 and kvm-31

[Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>]

Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>>
>>> I finally didn't resist to run git bisect before going to bed...
>>>
>>> The patch that causes the regression is:
>>>
>>> commit 7d2e674835492040c9baddf0989a95abea9a8d0f
>>> Author: Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
>>> Date:   Sun Jul 15 15:08:23 2007 +0300
>>>
>>>     kvm: qemu: synchronous signal handling
>>>     
>>>     in order to ensure that signals are handled with the global lock held, we
>>>     block them, and dequeue them with sigtimedwait().  we can then call the
>>>     handlers directly.
>>>     
>>>     this ensures that the device model and internal qemu data structures are not
>>>     corrupted by cpu 0 thread handling a signal while cpu 1 is servicing a pio
>>>     or mmio request.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> Is this with -net user or -net tap?
>>
>>     
>
> With -net tap.
>
>   

I pushed a commit which fixes a latency issue with that commit.  However 
with my test (ping -f against the host) I only get a x2 performance 
increase.  Can you test kvm-userspace.git?  And can you detail your 
benchmark?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/