Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:49:01AM +0200, Reeted wrote: On 09/28/11 11:28, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:19:43AM +0200, Reeted wrote: On 09/28/11 09:51, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: This is my bash commandline: /opt/qemu-kvm-0.14.1/bin/qemu-system-x86_64 -M pc-0.14

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:19:09PM +0200, Reeted wrote: On 09/28/11 11:53, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:49:01AM +0200, Reeted wrote: YES! It's the vhost. With vhost=on it takes about 12 seconds more time to boot. ...meaning? :-) I've no idea. I was always under the

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:19:09PM +0200, Reeted wrote: On 09/28/11 11:53, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:49:01AM +0200, Reeted wrote: YES! It's the vhost. With vhost=on it takes about 12 seconds more time to boot. ...meaning? :-) I've no idea. I was always under the

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Reeted
On 09/28/11 11:53, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:49:01AM +0200, Reeted wrote: YES! It's the vhost. With vhost=on it takes about 12 seconds more time to boot. ...meaning? :-) I've no idea. I was always under the impression that 'vhost=on' was the 'make it go much faster'

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Reeted
On 09/28/11 14:56, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:19:09PM +0200, Reeted wrote: Ok that seems to work: it removes the vhost part in the virsh launch hence cutting down 12secs of boot time. If nobody comes out with an explanation of why, I will open another thread on the

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Reeted
On 09/28/11 16:51, Reeted wrote: On 09/28/11 14:56, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:19:09PM +0200, Reeted wrote: Ok that seems to work: it removes the vhost part in the virsh launch hence cutting down 12secs of boot time. If nobody comes out with an explanation of why, I