Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754071AbZDTSDU (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:03:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751644AbZDTSDA (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:03:00 -0400 Received: from g5t0009.atlanta.hp.com ([15.192.0.46]:27036 "EHLO g5t0009.atlanta.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751281AbZDTSC6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:02:58 -0400 Subject: Re: [kvm] Re: [RFC PATCH 00/17] virtual-bus From: Alex Williamson To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Avi Kivity , Gregory Haskins , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, agraf@suse.de, pmullaney@novell.com, pmorreale@novell.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <49D5018E.4040801@codemonkey.ws> References: <20090331184057.28333.77287.stgit@dev.haskins.net> <87ab71monw.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <49D35825.3050001@novell.com> <20090401132340.GT11935@one.firstfloor.org> <49D37805.1060301@novell.com> <20090401170103.GU11935@one.firstfloor.org> <49D3B64F.6070703@codemonkey.ws> <49D3D7EE.4080202@novell.com> <49D46089.5040204@redhat.com> <49D497A1.4090900@novell.com> <49D4A4EB.8020105@redhat.com> <49D4AE0C.3000604@novell.com> <49D4B2C0.5060906@redhat.com> <49D4B594.6080703@novell.com> <49D4B8B4.4020003@redhat.com> <49D4BF70.1060301@novell.com> <49D4C191.2070502@redhat.com> <49D4CAA7.3020004@novell.com> <49D4CC61.6010105@redhat.com> <49D4CEB1.9020001@redhat.com> <49D4D075.9010702@codemonkey.ws> <49D4E33F.5000303@codemonkey.ws> <49D4E583.4080505@redhat.com> <49D5018E.4040801@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: OSLO R&D Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:02:54 -0600 Message-Id: <1240250574.26773.30.camel@lappy> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1075 Lines: 27 On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 13:18 -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: > > Anthony Liguori wrote: > >>> I don't think we even need that to end this debate. I'm convinced > >>> we have a bug somewhere. Even disabling TX mitigation, I see a ping > >>> latency of around 300ns whereas it's only 50ns on the host. This > >>> defies logic so I'm now looking to isolate why that is. > >> > >> I'm down to 90us. Obviously, s/ns/us/g above. The exec.c changes > >> were the big winner... I hate qemu sometimes. > > Anyway, if we're able to send this many packets, I suspect we'll be able > to also handle much higher throughputs without TX mitigation so that's > what I'm going to look at now. Anthony, Any news on this? I'm anxious to see virtio-net performance on par with the virtual-bus results. Thanks, Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/