Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755111Ab2FRJOM (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2012 05:14:12 -0400 Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:48848 "EHLO mail-lpp01m010-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751836Ab2FRJOL (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2012 05:14:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1340002390-3950-1-git-send-email-asias@redhat.com> References: <1340002390-3950-1-git-send-email-asias@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 10:14:09 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Improve virtio-blk performance From: Stefan Hajnoczi To: Asias He Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 864 Lines: 19 On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Asias He wrote: > Fio test shows it gives, 28%, 24%, 21%, 16% IOPS boost and 32%, 17%, 21%, 16% > latency improvement for sequential read/write, random read/write respectively. Sounds great. What storage configuration did you use (single spinning disk, SSD, storage array) and are these numbers for parallel I/O or sequential I/O? What changed since Minchan worked on this? I remember he wasn't satisfied that this was a clear win. Your numbers are strong so either you fixed something important or you are looking at different benchmark configurations. Stefan -- 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/