From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Asias He Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add vhost-blk support Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:21:02 +0800 Message-ID: <50052E7E.6020100@redhat.com> References: <1342107302-28116-1-git-send-email-asias@redhat.com> <50052276.2080906@redhat.com> <500527BA.9000001@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Benjamin LaHaise , Alexander Viro , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Paolo Bonzini Return-path: In-Reply-To: <500527BA.9000001@redhat.com> Sender: owner-linux-aio@kvack.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 07/17/2012 04:52 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 17/07/2012 10:29, Asias He ha scritto: >> So, vhost-blk at least saves ~6 syscalls for us in each request. > > Are they really 6? If I/O is coalesced by a factor of 3, for example > (i.e. each exit processes 3 requests), it's really 2 syscalls per request. Well. I am counting the number of syscalls in one notify and response process. Sure the IO can be coalesced. > Also, is there anything we can improve? Perhaps we can modify epoll and > ask it to clear the eventfd for us (would save 2 reads)? Or > io_getevents (would save 1)? > >> I guess you mean qemu here. Yes, in theory, qemu's block layer can be >> improved to achieve similar performance as vhost-blk or kvm tool's >> userspace virito-blk has. But I think it makes no sense to prevent one >> solution becase there is another in theory solution called: we can do >> similar in qemu. > > It depends. Like vhost-scsi, vhost-blk has the problem of a crippled > feature set: no support for block device formats, non-raw protocols, > etc. This makes it different from vhost-net. Data-plane qemu also has this cripppled feature set problem, no? Does user always choose to use block devices format like qcow2? What if they prefer raw image or raw block device? > > So it begs the question, is it going to be used in production, or just a > useful reference tool? This should be decided by user, I can not speak for them. What is wrong with adding one option for user which they can decide? -- Asias -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-aio' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux AIO, see: http://www.kvack.org/aio/ Don't email: aart@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754680Ab2GQJTU (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2012 05:19:20 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:23907 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751466Ab2GQJTS (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2012 05:19:18 -0400 Message-ID: <50052E7E.6020100@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:21:02 +0800 From: Asias He User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120615 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paolo Bonzini CC: Stefan Hajnoczi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Benjamin LaHaise , Alexander Viro , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add vhost-blk support References: <1342107302-28116-1-git-send-email-asias@redhat.com> <50052276.2080906@redhat.com> <500527BA.9000001@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <500527BA.9000001@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/17/2012 04:52 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 17/07/2012 10:29, Asias He ha scritto: >> So, vhost-blk at least saves ~6 syscalls for us in each request. > > Are they really 6? If I/O is coalesced by a factor of 3, for example > (i.e. each exit processes 3 requests), it's really 2 syscalls per request. Well. I am counting the number of syscalls in one notify and response process. Sure the IO can be coalesced. > Also, is there anything we can improve? Perhaps we can modify epoll and > ask it to clear the eventfd for us (would save 2 reads)? Or > io_getevents (would save 1)? > >> I guess you mean qemu here. Yes, in theory, qemu's block layer can be >> improved to achieve similar performance as vhost-blk or kvm tool's >> userspace virito-blk has. But I think it makes no sense to prevent one >> solution becase there is another in theory solution called: we can do >> similar in qemu. > > It depends. Like vhost-scsi, vhost-blk has the problem of a crippled > feature set: no support for block device formats, non-raw protocols, > etc. This makes it different from vhost-net. Data-plane qemu also has this cripppled feature set problem, no? Does user always choose to use block devices format like qcow2? What if they prefer raw image or raw block device? > > So it begs the question, is it going to be used in production, or just a > useful reference tool? This should be decided by user, I can not speak for them. What is wrong with adding one option for user which they can decide? -- Asias