lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model for vbus_driver objects
    Ingo Molnar wrote:
    >> I think the reason vbus gets better performance for networking
    >> today is that vbus' backends are in the kernel while virtio's
    >> backends are currently in userspace. Since Michael has a
    >> functioning in-kernel backend for virtio-net now, I suspect we're
    >> weeks (maybe days) away from performance results. My expectation
    >> is that vhost + virtio-net will be as good as venet + vbus. If
    >> that's the case, then I don't see any reason to adopt vbus unless
    >> Greg things there are other compelling features over virtio.
    >>
    >
    > Keeping virtio's backend in user-space was rather stupid IMHO.
    >

    I don't think it's quite so clear.

    There's nothing about vhost_net that would prevent a userspace
    application from using it as a higher performance replacement for tun/tap.

    The fact that we can avoid userspace for most of the fast paths is nice
    but that's really an issue of vhost_net vs. tun/tap.

    From the kernel's perspective, a KVM guest is just a userspace
    process. Having new userspace interfaces that are only useful to KVM
    guests would be a bad thing.

    Regards,

    Anthony Liguori


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-08-17 15:57    [W:4.034 / U:0.124 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site