From: Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_oss@crudebyte.com>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: "Venegas Munoz,
Jose Carlos" <jose.carlos.venegas.munoz@intel.com>,
"cdupontd@redhat.com" <cdupontd@redhat.com>,
virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>,
"Shinde, Archana M" <archana.m.shinde@intel.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] virtiofs vs 9p performance(Re: tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance)
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 15:04:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4973513.bp6ERB8pJA@silver> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200925124139.GJ2873@work-vm>
On Freitag, 25. September 2020 14:41:39 CEST Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> > So you are running following test.
> >
> > fio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test
> > --filename=random_read_write.fio --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G
> > --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75 --output=/output/fio.txt
> >
> > And following are your results.
> >
> > 9p
> > --
> > READ: bw=211MiB/s (222MB/s), 211MiB/s-211MiB/s (222MB/s-222MB/s),
> > io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=14532-14532msec
> >
> > WRITE: bw=70.6MiB/s (74.0MB/s), 70.6MiB/s-70.6MiB/s (74.0MB/s-74.0MB/s),
> > io=1026MiB (1076MB), run=14532-14532msec
> >
> > virtiofs
> > --------
> >
> > Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> > READ: bw=159MiB/s (167MB/s), 159MiB/s-159MiB/s (167MB/s-167MB/s),
> > io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=19321-19321msec>
> > WRITE: bw=53.1MiB/s (55.7MB/s), 53.1MiB/s-53.1MiB/s (55.7MB/s-55.7MB/s),
> > io=1026MiB (1076MB), run=19321-19321msec>
> > So looks like you are getting better performance with 9p in this case.
>
> That's interesting, because I've just tried similar again with my
> ramdisk setup:
>
> fio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=random_read_write.fio
> --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75
> --output=aname.txt
>
>
> virtiofs default options
> test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T)
> 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=64 fio-3.21
> Starting 1 process
> test: Laying out IO file (1 file / 4096MiB)
>
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=773: Fri Sep 25 12:28:32 2020
> read: IOPS=18.3k, BW=71.3MiB/s (74.8MB/s)(3070MiB/43042msec)
> bw ( KiB/s): min=70752, max=77280, per=100.00%, avg=73075.71,
> stdev=1603.47, samples=85 iops : min=17688, max=19320, avg=18268.92,
> stdev=400.86, samples=85 write: IOPS=6102, BW=23.8MiB/s
> (24.0MB/s)(1026MiB/43042msec); 0 zone resets bw ( KiB/s): min=23128,
> max=25696, per=100.00%, avg=24420.40, stdev=583.08, samples=85 iops
> : min= 5782, max= 6424, avg=6105.09, stdev=145.76, samples=85 cpu
> : usr=0.10%, sys=30.09%, ctx=1245312, majf=0, minf=6 IO depths :
> 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued rwts:
> total=785920,262656,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0 latency : target=0,
> window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=71.3MiB/s (74.8MB/s), 71.3MiB/s-71.3MiB/s (74.8MB/s-74.8MB/s),
> io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=43042-43042msec WRITE: bw=23.8MiB/s (24.0MB/s),
> 23.8MiB/s-23.8MiB/s (24.0MB/s-24.0MB/s), io=1026MiB (1076MB),
> run=43042-43042msec
>
> virtiofs cache=none
> test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T)
> 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=64 fio-3.21
> Starting 1 process
>
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=740: Fri Sep 25 12:30:57 2020
> read: IOPS=22.9k, BW=89.6MiB/s (93.0MB/s)(3070MiB/34256msec)
> bw ( KiB/s): min=89048, max=94240, per=100.00%, avg=91871.06,
> stdev=967.87, samples=68 iops : min=22262, max=23560, avg=22967.76,
> stdev=241.97, samples=68 write: IOPS=7667, BW=29.0MiB/s
> (31.4MB/s)(1026MiB/34256msec); 0 zone resets bw ( KiB/s): min=29264,
> max=32248, per=100.00%, avg=30700.82, stdev=541.97, samples=68 iops
> : min= 7316, max= 8062, avg=7675.21, stdev=135.49, samples=68 cpu
> : usr=1.03%, sys=27.64%, ctx=1048635, majf=0, minf=5 IO depths :
> 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued rwts:
> total=785920,262656,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0 latency : target=0,
> window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=89.6MiB/s (93.0MB/s), 89.6MiB/s-89.6MiB/s (93.0MB/s-93.0MB/s),
> io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=34256-34256msec WRITE: bw=29.0MiB/s (31.4MB/s),
> 29.0MiB/s-29.0MiB/s (31.4MB/s-31.4MB/s), io=1026MiB (1076MB),
> run=34256-34256msec
>
> virtiofs cache=none thread-pool-size=1
> test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T)
> 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=64 fio-3.21
> Starting 1 process
>
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=738: Fri Sep 25 12:33:17 2020
> read: IOPS=23.7k, BW=92.4MiB/s (96.9MB/s)(3070MiB/33215msec)
> bw ( KiB/s): min=89808, max=111952, per=100.00%, avg=94762.30,
> stdev=4507.43, samples=66 iops : min=22452, max=27988, avg=23690.58,
> stdev=1126.86, samples=66 write: IOPS=7907, BW=30.9MiB/s
> (32.4MB/s)(1026MiB/33215msec); 0 zone resets bw ( KiB/s): min=29424,
> max=37112, per=100.00%, avg=31668.73, stdev=1558.69, samples=66 iops
> : min= 7356, max= 9278, avg=7917.18, stdev=389.67, samples=66 cpu
> : usr=0.43%, sys=29.07%, ctx=1048627, majf=0, minf=7 IO depths :
> 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued rwts:
> total=785920,262656,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0 latency : target=0,
> window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=92.4MiB/s (96.9MB/s), 92.4MiB/s-92.4MiB/s (96.9MB/s-96.9MB/s),
> io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=33215-33215msec WRITE: bw=30.9MiB/s (32.4MB/s),
> 30.9MiB/s-30.9MiB/s (32.4MB/s-32.4MB/s), io=1026MiB (1076MB),
> run=33215-33215msec
>
> 9p ( mount -t 9p -o trans=virtio kernel /mnt
> -oversion=9p2000.L,cache=mmap,msize=1048576 ) test: (g=0): rw=randrw,
Bottleneck ------------------------------^
By increasing 'msize' you would encounter better 9P I/O results.
> bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync,
> iodepth=64 fio-3.21
> Starting 1 process
>
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=736: Fri Sep 25 12:36:00 2020
> read: IOPS=16.2k, BW=63.5MiB/s (66.6MB/s)(3070MiB/48366msec)
> bw ( KiB/s): min=63426, max=82776, per=100.00%, avg=65054.28,
> stdev=2014.88, samples=96 iops : min=15856, max=20694, avg=16263.34,
> stdev=503.74, samples=96 write: IOPS=5430, BW=21.2MiB/s
> (22.2MB/s)(1026MiB/48366msec); 0 zone resets bw ( KiB/s): min=20916,
> max=27632, per=100.00%, avg=21740.64, stdev=735.73, samples=96 iops
> : min= 5229, max= 6908, avg=5434.99, stdev=183.95, samples=96 cpu
> : usr=1.60%, sys=14.28%, ctx=1049348, majf=0, minf=7 IO depths :
> 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued rwts:
> total=785920,262656,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0 latency : target=0,
> window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=63.5MiB/s (66.6MB/s), 63.5MiB/s-63.5MiB/s (66.6MB/s-66.6MB/s),
> io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=48366-48366msec WRITE: bw=21.2MiB/s (22.2MB/s),
> 21.2MiB/s-21.2MiB/s (22.2MB/s-22.2MB/s), io=1026MiB (1076MB),
> run=48366-48366msec
>
> So I'm sitll beating 9p; the thread-pool-size=1 seems to be great for
> read performance here.
>
> Dave
Best regards,
Christian Schoenebeck
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_oss@crudebyte.com>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
"Venegas Munoz,
Jose Carlos" <jose.carlos.venegas.munoz@intel.com>,
"cdupontd@redhat.com" <cdupontd@redhat.com>,
virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
"Shinde, Archana M" <archana.m.shinde@intel.com>
Subject: Re: virtiofs vs 9p performance(Re: tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance)
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 15:04:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4973513.bp6ERB8pJA@silver> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200925124139.GJ2873@work-vm>
On Freitag, 25. September 2020 14:41:39 CEST Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> > So you are running following test.
> >
> > fio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test
> > --filename=random_read_write.fio --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G
> > --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75 --output=/output/fio.txt
> >
> > And following are your results.
> >
> > 9p
> > --
> > READ: bw=211MiB/s (222MB/s), 211MiB/s-211MiB/s (222MB/s-222MB/s),
> > io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=14532-14532msec
> >
> > WRITE: bw=70.6MiB/s (74.0MB/s), 70.6MiB/s-70.6MiB/s (74.0MB/s-74.0MB/s),
> > io=1026MiB (1076MB), run=14532-14532msec
> >
> > virtiofs
> > --------
> >
> > Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> > READ: bw=159MiB/s (167MB/s), 159MiB/s-159MiB/s (167MB/s-167MB/s),
> > io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=19321-19321msec>
> > WRITE: bw=53.1MiB/s (55.7MB/s), 53.1MiB/s-53.1MiB/s (55.7MB/s-55.7MB/s),
> > io=1026MiB (1076MB), run=19321-19321msec>
> > So looks like you are getting better performance with 9p in this case.
>
> That's interesting, because I've just tried similar again with my
> ramdisk setup:
>
> fio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=random_read_write.fio
> --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75
> --output=aname.txt
>
>
> virtiofs default options
> test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T)
> 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=64 fio-3.21
> Starting 1 process
> test: Laying out IO file (1 file / 4096MiB)
>
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=773: Fri Sep 25 12:28:32 2020
> read: IOPS=18.3k, BW=71.3MiB/s (74.8MB/s)(3070MiB/43042msec)
> bw ( KiB/s): min=70752, max=77280, per=100.00%, avg=73075.71,
> stdev=1603.47, samples=85 iops : min=17688, max=19320, avg=18268.92,
> stdev=400.86, samples=85 write: IOPS=6102, BW=23.8MiB/s
> (24.0MB/s)(1026MiB/43042msec); 0 zone resets bw ( KiB/s): min=23128,
> max=25696, per=100.00%, avg=24420.40, stdev=583.08, samples=85 iops
> : min= 5782, max= 6424, avg=6105.09, stdev=145.76, samples=85 cpu
> : usr=0.10%, sys=30.09%, ctx=1245312, majf=0, minf=6 IO depths :
> 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued rwts:
> total=785920,262656,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0 latency : target=0,
> window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=71.3MiB/s (74.8MB/s), 71.3MiB/s-71.3MiB/s (74.8MB/s-74.8MB/s),
> io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=43042-43042msec WRITE: bw=23.8MiB/s (24.0MB/s),
> 23.8MiB/s-23.8MiB/s (24.0MB/s-24.0MB/s), io=1026MiB (1076MB),
> run=43042-43042msec
>
> virtiofs cache=none
> test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T)
> 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=64 fio-3.21
> Starting 1 process
>
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=740: Fri Sep 25 12:30:57 2020
> read: IOPS=22.9k, BW=89.6MiB/s (93.0MB/s)(3070MiB/34256msec)
> bw ( KiB/s): min=89048, max=94240, per=100.00%, avg=91871.06,
> stdev=967.87, samples=68 iops : min=22262, max=23560, avg=22967.76,
> stdev=241.97, samples=68 write: IOPS=7667, BW=29.0MiB/s
> (31.4MB/s)(1026MiB/34256msec); 0 zone resets bw ( KiB/s): min=29264,
> max=32248, per=100.00%, avg=30700.82, stdev=541.97, samples=68 iops
> : min= 7316, max= 8062, avg=7675.21, stdev=135.49, samples=68 cpu
> : usr=1.03%, sys=27.64%, ctx=1048635, majf=0, minf=5 IO depths :
> 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued rwts:
> total=785920,262656,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0 latency : target=0,
> window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=89.6MiB/s (93.0MB/s), 89.6MiB/s-89.6MiB/s (93.0MB/s-93.0MB/s),
> io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=34256-34256msec WRITE: bw=29.0MiB/s (31.4MB/s),
> 29.0MiB/s-29.0MiB/s (31.4MB/s-31.4MB/s), io=1026MiB (1076MB),
> run=34256-34256msec
>
> virtiofs cache=none thread-pool-size=1
> test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T)
> 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=64 fio-3.21
> Starting 1 process
>
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=738: Fri Sep 25 12:33:17 2020
> read: IOPS=23.7k, BW=92.4MiB/s (96.9MB/s)(3070MiB/33215msec)
> bw ( KiB/s): min=89808, max=111952, per=100.00%, avg=94762.30,
> stdev=4507.43, samples=66 iops : min=22452, max=27988, avg=23690.58,
> stdev=1126.86, samples=66 write: IOPS=7907, BW=30.9MiB/s
> (32.4MB/s)(1026MiB/33215msec); 0 zone resets bw ( KiB/s): min=29424,
> max=37112, per=100.00%, avg=31668.73, stdev=1558.69, samples=66 iops
> : min= 7356, max= 9278, avg=7917.18, stdev=389.67, samples=66 cpu
> : usr=0.43%, sys=29.07%, ctx=1048627, majf=0, minf=7 IO depths :
> 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued rwts:
> total=785920,262656,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0 latency : target=0,
> window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=92.4MiB/s (96.9MB/s), 92.4MiB/s-92.4MiB/s (96.9MB/s-96.9MB/s),
> io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=33215-33215msec WRITE: bw=30.9MiB/s (32.4MB/s),
> 30.9MiB/s-30.9MiB/s (32.4MB/s-32.4MB/s), io=1026MiB (1076MB),
> run=33215-33215msec
>
> 9p ( mount -t 9p -o trans=virtio kernel /mnt
> -oversion=9p2000.L,cache=mmap,msize=1048576 ) test: (g=0): rw=randrw,
Bottleneck ------------------------------^
By increasing 'msize' you would encounter better 9P I/O results.
> bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync,
> iodepth=64 fio-3.21
> Starting 1 process
>
> test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=736: Fri Sep 25 12:36:00 2020
> read: IOPS=16.2k, BW=63.5MiB/s (66.6MB/s)(3070MiB/48366msec)
> bw ( KiB/s): min=63426, max=82776, per=100.00%, avg=65054.28,
> stdev=2014.88, samples=96 iops : min=15856, max=20694, avg=16263.34,
> stdev=503.74, samples=96 write: IOPS=5430, BW=21.2MiB/s
> (22.2MB/s)(1026MiB/48366msec); 0 zone resets bw ( KiB/s): min=20916,
> max=27632, per=100.00%, avg=21740.64, stdev=735.73, samples=96 iops
> : min= 5229, max= 6908, avg=5434.99, stdev=183.95, samples=96 cpu
> : usr=1.60%, sys=14.28%, ctx=1049348, majf=0, minf=7 IO depths :
> 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete :
> 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued rwts:
> total=785920,262656,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0 latency : target=0,
> window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=63.5MiB/s (66.6MB/s), 63.5MiB/s-63.5MiB/s (66.6MB/s-66.6MB/s),
> io=3070MiB (3219MB), run=48366-48366msec WRITE: bw=21.2MiB/s (22.2MB/s),
> 21.2MiB/s-21.2MiB/s (22.2MB/s-22.2MB/s), io=1026MiB (1076MB),
> run=48366-48366msec
>
> So I'm sitll beating 9p; the thread-pool-size=1 seems to be great for
> read performance here.
>
> Dave
Best regards,
Christian Schoenebeck
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-25 13:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 107+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-18 21:34 [Virtio-fs] tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance Vivek Goyal
2020-09-18 21:34 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-21 8:39 ` [Virtio-fs] " Stefan Hajnoczi
2020-09-21 8:39 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2020-09-21 13:39 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-21 13:39 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-21 16:57 ` [Virtio-fs] " Stefan Hajnoczi
2020-09-21 16:57 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2020-09-21 8:50 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-21 8:50 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-21 13:35 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-21 13:35 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-21 14:08 ` [Virtio-fs] " Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-09-21 14:08 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-09-21 15:32 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-21 15:32 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-22 10:25 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-22 10:25 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-22 17:47 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-22 17:47 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-24 21:33 ` [Virtio-fs] " Venegas Munoz, Jose Carlos
2020-09-24 21:33 ` Venegas Munoz, Jose Carlos
2020-09-24 22:10 ` [Virtio-fs] virtiofs vs 9p performance(Re: tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance) Vivek Goyal
2020-09-24 22:10 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-25 8:06 ` [Virtio-fs] virtiofs vs 9p performance Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 8:06 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 13:13 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-25 13:13 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-25 15:47 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 15:47 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-19 16:08 ` [Virtio-fs] Can not set high msize with virtio-9p (Was: Re: virtiofs vs 9p performance) Vivek Goyal
2021-02-19 16:08 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-02-19 17:33 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-19 17:33 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-19 19:01 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2021-02-19 19:01 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-02-20 15:38 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-20 15:38 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-22 12:18 ` [Virtio-fs] " Greg Kurz
2021-02-22 12:18 ` Greg Kurz
2021-02-22 15:08 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-22 15:08 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-22 17:11 ` [Virtio-fs] " Greg Kurz
2021-02-22 17:11 ` Greg Kurz
2021-02-23 13:39 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-23 13:39 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-23 14:07 ` [Virtio-fs] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-02-23 14:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-02-24 15:16 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-24 15:16 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-24 15:43 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dominique Martinet
2021-02-24 15:43 ` Dominique Martinet
2021-02-26 13:49 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-26 13:49 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-02-27 0:03 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dominique Martinet
2021-02-27 0:03 ` Dominique Martinet
2021-03-03 14:04 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2021-03-03 14:04 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-03-03 14:50 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dominique Martinet
2021-03-03 14:50 ` Dominique Martinet
2021-03-05 14:57 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2021-03-05 14:57 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 12:41 ` [Virtio-fs] virtiofs vs 9p performance(Re: tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance) Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-25 12:41 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-25 13:04 ` Christian Schoenebeck [this message]
2020-09-25 13:04 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 13:05 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-25 13:05 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-25 16:05 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 16:05 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 16:33 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 16:33 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-25 18:51 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-25 18:51 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-27 12:14 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-27 12:14 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-29 13:03 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 13:03 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 13:28 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-29 13:28 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-29 13:49 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 13:49 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 13:59 ` [Virtio-fs] " Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-29 13:59 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-09-29 13:17 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 13:17 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 13:49 ` [Virtio-fs] " Miklos Szeredi
2020-09-29 13:49 ` Miklos Szeredi
2020-09-29 14:01 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 14:01 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 14:54 ` Miklos Szeredi
2020-09-29 14:54 ` Miklos Szeredi
2020-09-29 15:28 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-29 15:28 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-25 12:11 ` [Virtio-fs] tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-25 12:11 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-25 13:11 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-25 13:11 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-21 20:16 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-21 20:16 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-22 11:09 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-22 11:09 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-22 22:56 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2020-09-22 22:56 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-23 12:50 ` [Virtio-fs] " Chirantan Ekbote
2020-09-23 12:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-09-25 11:35 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
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=4973513.bp6ERB8pJA@silver \
--to=qemu_oss@crudebyte.com \
--cc=archana.m.shinde@intel.com \
--cc=cdupontd@redhat.com \
--cc=jose.carlos.venegas.munoz@intel.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=virtio-fs@redhat.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.