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: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:23:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20111116072317.GG5433@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> <20111114130507.GA18288@redhat.com> <877h31ortx.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Krishna Kumar , gorcunov@gmail.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Asias He , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Pekka Enberg , Sasha Levin , netdev@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, Stephen Hemminger To: Rusty Russell Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <877h31ortx.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> 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 Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:34:42AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:07 +0200, "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > 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. > > If we have one queue per guest CPU, does this allow us to run lockless? > > Thanks, > Rusty. LLTX? It's supposed to be deprecated, isn't it? -- MST