From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
To: KVM mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: performance of virtual functions compared to virtio
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:57:04 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DAF8EF0.8010203@gmail.com> (raw)
In general should virtual functions outperform virtio+vhost for
networking performance - latency and throughput?
I have 2 VMs running on a host. Each VM has 2 nics -- one tied to a VF
and the other going through virtio and a tap device like so:
------ ----
| |----------------| VF |---
| | ---- |
| VM 1 | |
| | ----- |
| |---| tap |--- |
------ ----- | ---
--- | e |
| b | | t |
| r | | h |
--- | 2 |
------ ----- | ---
| |---| tap |--- |
| | ----- |
| VM 2 | |
| | ---- |
| |----------------| VF |---
------ ----
The network arguments to qemu-kvm are:
-netdev type=tap,vhost=on,ifname=tap2,id=netdev1
-device virtio-net-pci,mac=${mac},netdev=netdev1
where ${mac} is unique to each VM and for the VF:
-device pci-assign,host=${pciid}
netserver is running within the VMs, and the netperf commands I am
running are:
netperf -p 12346 -H <ip> -l 20 -jcC -fM -v 2 -t TCP_RR -- -r 1024
netperf -p 12346 -H <ip> -l 20 -jcC -fM -v 2 -t TCP_STREAM
where <ip> changes depending on which interface I want to send the
traffic through. To say the least results are a bit disappointing for
the VF:
latency throughput
(usec/Tran) (MB/sec)
Host-VM
over virtio 139.160 1199.40
over VF 488.124 209.22
VM-VM
over virtio 322.056 773.54
over VF 488.051 328.88
I am just getting started with VFs and could use some hints on how to
improve the performance.
Host:
Dell R410
2 quad core E5620@2.40 GHz processors
16 GB RAM
Intel 82576 NIC (Gigabit ET Quad Port)
Fedora 14
kernel: 2.6.35.12-88.fc14.x86_64
qemu-kvm-0.13.0-1.fc14.x86_64
VMs:
Fedora 14
kernel 2.6.35.11-83.fc14.x86_64
2 vcpus
1GB RAM
Thanks,
David
next reply other threads:[~2011-04-21 1:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-21 1:57 David Ahern [this message]
2011-04-21 2:35 ` performance of virtual functions compared to virtio Alex Williamson
2011-04-21 8:07 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-21 12:31 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2011-04-21 13:09 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-25 17:49 ` David Ahern
2011-04-26 8:19 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-27 21:13 ` David Ahern
2011-04-28 8:07 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-25 17:46 ` David Ahern
2011-04-26 8:20 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-25 17:39 ` David Ahern
2011-04-25 18:13 ` Alex Williamson
2011-04-25 19:07 ` David Ahern
2011-04-25 19:29 ` Alex Williamson
2011-04-25 19:49 ` David Ahern
2011-04-25 20:27 ` Alex Williamson
2011-04-25 20:40 ` David Ahern
2011-04-25 21:02 ` Alex Williamson
2011-04-25 21:14 ` David Ahern
2011-04-25 21:18 ` Alex Williamson
2011-04-25 20:49 ` Andrew Theurer
2011-05-02 18:58 ` David Ahern
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=4DAF8EF0.8010203@gmail.com \
--to=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
/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.