From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [RFC] kvm tools: Implement multiple VQ for virtio-net Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:07 +0200 Message-ID: <20111114130507.GA18288@redhat.com> References: <1321049521-26376-1-git-send-email-levinsasha928@gmail.com> <20111113102428.GD15322@redhat.com> <1321196430.2425.2.camel@sasha> <4EC07729.3050303@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Krishna Kumar , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Asias He , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, gorcunov@gmail.com, Sasha Levin , netdev@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu To: Pekka Enberg Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 02:25:17PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Asias He wrote: > > Why both the bandwidth and latency performance are dropping so dramatically > > with multiple VQ? > > What's the expected benefit from multiple VQs Heh, the original patchset didn't mention this :) It really should. They are supposed to speed up networking for high smp guests. > i.e. why are doing the patches Sasha? -- MST