From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: listmail Subject: Re: Re: network performance drop heavily in xen 4.0 release Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:03:18 -0400 Message-ID: <4BD31646.30309@triad.rr.com> References: <20100418185506.GN1878@reaktio.net> <4BD31501.1090109@triad.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4BD31501.1090109@triad.rr.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: "yingbin wang ;" Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Or nevermind... :) The *config-2.6.31-13xen you originally posted was the one *with* the performance issue. I was surprised to not see any debug differences. *listmail wrote: > Do you mind attaching the config for 2.6.18.8 ? I believe we should > be comparing that with "config-2.6.31.13-high performance" > > > Ronaldo C. A. Chaves wrote: >> I compared the config-2.6.31-13xen* *with the config-2.6.31.13-high >> performance. >> >> >> 2010/4/24 yingbin wang > > >> >> which .config you compare with? >> >> 2010/4/24 Ronaldo C. A. Chaves > >: >> > I compared the files and the difference is >> > >> > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP=m >> > CONFIG_ATA_PIIX=m >> > CONFIG_XEN_DEV_EVTCHN=y >> > >> > in config-2.6.31.13-high performance. >> > >> > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel