Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Apr 2009 09:11:25 +0800 | From | Herbert Xu <> | Subject | Re: [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
| |