lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH net-next RFC 0/5] xen-netback: TX grant mapping instead of copy
From
Date
On Thu, 2013-12-12 at 22:08 +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> On 28/11/13 17:43, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 17:37 +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> > Routing/firewalling domUs is as valid as bridging. There is nothing in
> > the slightest bit suboptimal about it.
> >
> > If this use case regresses with this approach then I'm afraid that
> > either needs to be addressed or a different approach considered.
> >
> >> Anyway, I will try this out, and see if it really copies everything, and
> >> get some numbers as well.
> >
> > Thanks.
>
> Now I managed to try it out. As I expected, Dom0 does copy the mapped
> page. The peak throuhput I could get was 6.6 Gbps, however it could keep
> that only for short periods, I guess when the unmapping was ideally
> batched. The average was 5.53.
> On the same machine the same 10 min iperf session, without my patches
> made the peak 5.9 while the average was 5.65. Do you think it is an
> acceptable regression?

Well, it would of course be preferable to avoid it. I'm quite reluctant
to see this scenario become a second class citizen.

> I used 3.12 Dom0 and guest kernel, the guest transmitted though a 10Gb
> card to a bare metal box.
> I plan to look further if we can avoid somehow this:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/20/363
>
> So then this scenario can benefit from grant mapping.
>
> Regards,
>
> Zoli




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-16 12:01    [W:0.062 / U:0.284 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site