Anthony Liguori wrote:
Hi Mark,
Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hey,
Here's a bunch of patches attempting to improve the performance
of virtio_net. This is more an RFC rather than a patch submission
since, as can be seen below, not all patches actually improve the
perfomance measurably.
I'm still seeing the same problem I saw with my patch series. Namely,
dhclient fails to get a DHCP address. Rusty noticed that RX has a lot
more packets received then it should so we're suspicious that we're
getting packet corruption.
I have been discussing this (on this list) in another thread. Putting
tcpdump on the eth0 device in the VM, the br0 device in the host, and
the eth0 (physical NIC) in the host, you can see that when the VM
generates a DHCP request it shows up on the br0 in the host, but never
gets sent on the wire by eth0.
That's the point of failure, at least using RHEL5/FC6/kvm-66 as the
environment.
Configuring the tap device with a static address, here's what I get with
iperf:
w/o patches:
guest->host: 625 Mbits/sec
host->guest: 825 Mbits/sec
w/patches
guest->host: 2.02 Gbits/sec
host->guest: 1.89 Gbits/sec
guest lo: 4.35 Gbits/sec
host lo: 4.36 Gbits/sec
This is with KVM GUEST configured FWIW.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
--
Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
