lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 00/17] virtual-bus
    Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
    >
    > 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.

    Awesome! I'm prepared to eat my words :)

    On the subject of TX mitigation, can we please set a standard
    on how we measure it? For instance, do we bind the the backend
    qemu to the same CPU as the guest, or do we bind it to a different
    CPU that shares cache? They're two completely different scenarios
    and I think we should be explicit about which one we're measuring.

    Thanks,
    --
    Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
    Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
    Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
    PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-04-03 03:15    [W:2.708 / U:0.016 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site