From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Qin Chuanyu <qinchuanyu@huawei.com>
Cc: jasowang@redhat.com, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>,
KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 8% performance improved by change tap interact with kernel stack
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 09:56:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140129075630.GC23228@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52E8B0A4.6030806@huawei.com>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 03:41:24PM +0800, Qin Chuanyu wrote:
> On 2014/1/28 18:33, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> >>>Nice.
> >>>What about CPU utilization?
> >>>It's trivially easy to speed up networking by
> >>>burning up a lot of CPU so we must make sure it's
> >>>not doing that.
> >>>And I think we should see some tests with TCP as well, and
> >>>try several message sizes.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Yes, by burning up more CPU we could get better performance easily.
> >>So I have bond vhost thread and interrupt of nic on CPU1 while testing.
> >>
> >>modified before, the idle of CPU1 is 0%-1% while testing.
> >>and after modify, the idle of CPU1 is 2%-3% while testing
> >>
> >>TCP also could gain from this, but pps is less than UDP, so I think
> >>the improvement would be not so obviously.
> >
> >Still need to test this doesn't regress but overall looks convincing to me.
> >Could you send a patch, accompanied by testing results for
> >throughput latency and cpu utilization for tcp and udp
> >with various message sizes?
> >
> >Thanks!
> >
> because of spring festival of china, the test result would be given
> two week later.
> throughput would be test by netperf, and latency would be tested by
> qperf. Is that OK?
For testing - sounds good. Run vmstat in host to check host cpu utilization.
Pls don't forget to address all issues raised in this thread and in
the old one Eric mentioned:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/52963/
either address in code or address in commit log why it doesn't apply
anymore.
--
MST
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-29 7:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-28 8:14 8% performance improved by change tap interact with kernel stack Qin Chuanyu
2014-01-28 8:34 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-28 9:14 ` Qin Chuanyu
2014-01-28 9:41 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-28 10:19 ` Qin Chuanyu
2014-01-28 10:33 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-28 16:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
2014-01-28 17:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-29 7:41 ` Qin Chuanyu
2014-01-29 7:56 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2014-01-28 16:56 ` Rick Jones
2014-01-28 14:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-01-29 7:12 ` Qin Chuanyu
2014-02-11 13:21 ` Qin Chuanyu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140129075630.GC23228@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qinchuanyu@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).