From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754725Ab1ISJln (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 05:41:43 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:20316 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751736Ab1ISJlm (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 05:41:42 -0400 Message-ID: <4E770EF5.90705@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:44:21 +0800 From: Jason Wang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110126 Red Hat/3.1.8-1.el6 Thunderbird/3.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" CC: krkumar2@in.ibm.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, davem@davemloft.net, kvm@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl, joe@perches.com, shemminger@vyatta.com Subject: Re: [net-next RFC V2 PATCH 0/5] Multiqueue support in tun/tap References: <20110917055639.32666.89940.stgit@dhcp-91-7.nay.redhat.com.englab.nay.redhat.com> <20110917191709.GA6127@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20110917191709.GA6127@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/18/2011 03:17 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 02:02:04PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> A wiki-page was created to narrate the detail design of all parts >> involved in the multi queue implementation: >> http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Multiqueue and some basic tests result >> could be seen in this page >> http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Multiqueue-performance-Sep-13. I would >> post the detail numbers in attachment as the reply of this thread. > Does it make sense to test both with and without RPS in guest? > I've tested with RPS in guest, but didn't see improvements. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Wang Subject: Re: [net-next RFC V2 PATCH 0/5] Multiqueue support in tun/tap Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:44:21 +0800 Message-ID: <4E770EF5.90705@redhat.com> References: <20110917055639.32666.89940.stgit@dhcp-91-7.nay.redhat.com.englab.nay.redhat.com> <20110917191709.GA6127@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: krkumar2@in.ibm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, joe@perches.com, shemminger@vyatta.com, mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl, davem@davemloft.net To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110917191709.GA6127@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 09/18/2011 03:17 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 02:02:04PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> A wiki-page was created to narrate the detail design of all parts >> involved in the multi queue implementation: >> http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Multiqueue and some basic tests result >> could be seen in this page >> http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Multiqueue-performance-Sep-13. I would >> post the detail numbers in attachment as the reply of this thread. > Does it make sense to test both with and without RPS in guest? > I've tested with RPS in guest, but didn't see improvements. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:32969) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R5aM3-0001Uy-Ij for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 05:41:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R5aM2-0004lP-7v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 05:41:35 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:63262) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R5aM2-0004lK-0o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 05:41:34 -0400 Message-ID: <4E770EF5.90705@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:44:21 +0800 From: Jason Wang MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20110917055639.32666.89940.stgit@dhcp-91-7.nay.redhat.com.englab.nay.redhat.com> <20110917191709.GA6127@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20110917191709.GA6127@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [net-next RFC V2 PATCH 0/5] Multiqueue support in tun/tap List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: krkumar2@in.ibm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, joe@perches.com, shemminger@vyatta.com, mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl, davem@davemloft.net On 09/18/2011 03:17 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 02:02:04PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> A wiki-page was created to narrate the detail design of all parts >> involved in the multi queue implementation: >> http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Multiqueue and some basic tests result >> could be seen in this page >> http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Multiqueue-performance-Sep-13. I would >> post the detail numbers in attachment as the reply of this thread. > Does it make sense to test both with and without RPS in guest? > I've tested with RPS in guest, but didn't see improvements.