From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [v3 RFC PATCH 0/4] Implement multiqueue virtio-net
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:38:46 +0200
Message-ID: <20101026093846.GA6766@redhat.com>
References: <20101020085452.15579.76002.sendpatchset@krkumar2.in.ibm.com>
 <OF8735A2A4.74B4EE91-ON652577C5.0040D90B-652577C7.0056B99D@in.ibm.com>
 <20101025161718.GA19559@redhat.com>
 <OF5C53E9CF.FFDF2CE7-ON652577C8.00191D14-652577C8.001C2154@LocalDomain>
 <OFBB51646E.01CC3630-ON652577C8.0030D6EF-652577C8.0031DA3C@in.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: anthony@codemonkey.ws, arnd@arndb.de, avi@redhat.com,
	davem@davemloft.net, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au
To: Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@in.ibm.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:27265 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1758816Ab0JZJpm (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 26 Oct 2010 05:45:42 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <OFBB51646E.01CC3630-ON652577C8.0030D6EF-652577C8.0031DA3C@in.ibm.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 02:38:53PM +0530, Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
> Results for UDP BW tests (unidirectional, sum across
> 3 iterations, each iteration of 45 seconds, default
> netperf, vhosts bound to cpus 0-3; no other tuning):

Is binding vhost threads to CPUs really required?
What happens if we let the scheduler do its job?

-- 
MST