From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Zhang Haoyu" <zhanghy@sangfor.com>
Subject: Re: Benchmarking for vhost polling patch
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:21:36 +0800
Message-ID: <201410311021342807050@sangfor.com>
References: <1414586281-razya@il.ibm.com>,
 <20141029123831.A80F338002D@moren.haifa.ibm.com>,
 <201410301930058431451@sangfor.com>,
 <OFFF875B50.07DB48E8-ONC2257D81.004243F6-C2257D81.0042FFAE@il.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "kvm" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "mst" <mst@redhat.com>
To: "Razya Ladelsky" <RAZYA@il.ibm.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from smtp.sanfor.com ([58.251.49.30]:56279 "EHLO mail.sangfor.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1161558AbaJaCV4 (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 30 Oct 2014 22:21:56 -0400
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

>> > Hi Michael,
>> > 
>> > Following the polling patch thread: http://marc.info/?
>> l=kvm&m=140853271510179&w=2, 
>> > I changed poll_stop_idle to be counted in micro seconds, and carried 
>out 
>> > experiments using varying sizes of this value. The setup for 
>> netperf consisted of 
>> > 1 vm and 1 vhost , each running on their own dedicated core.
>> > 
>> Could you provide your changing code?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Zhang Haoyu
>> 
>Hi Zhang,
>Do you mean the change in code for poll_stop_idle?
Yes, it's better to provide the complete code, including the polling patch.

Thanks,
Zhang Haoyu
>Thanks,
>Razya