On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 23:09 +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Anthony Liguori schrieb:
(...)
So, a PV network driver can do about 700Mb/s, and an emulated NIC can
do about 600 Mb/s, Windows guest to host?
That would be about 20% improvement?
FWIW, virtio-net is much
Anthony Liguori wrote:
FWIW, virtio-net is much better with my patches applied.
The can_receive patches?
Again, I'm not opposed to them in principle, I just think that if they
help that this points at a virtio deficiency. Virtio should never leave
the rx queue empty. Consider the case where
Dor Laor schrieb:
(...)
FWIW, virtio-net is much better with my patches applied. The difference
between the e1000 and virtio-net is that e1000 consumes almost twice as
much CPU as virtio-net so in my testing, the performance improvement
with virtio-net is about 2x. We were loosing about
Avi Kivity wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
FWIW, virtio-net is much better with my patches applied.
The can_receive patches?
Again, I'm not opposed to them in principle, I just think that if they
help that this points at a virtio deficiency. Virtio should never
leave the rx queue empty.
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
FWIW, virtio-net is much better with my patches applied.
The can_receive patches?
Again, I'm not opposed to them in principle, I just think that if
they help that this points at a virtio deficiency. Virtio should
never
Avi Kivity wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
FWIW, virtio-net is much better with my patches applied.
The can_receive patches?
Again, I'm not opposed to them in principle, I just think that if
they help that this points at a virtio deficiency. Virtio
Avi Kivity wrote:
This is the second release of network drivers for Windows guests running
on a kvm host. The drivers are intended for Windows 2000 and Windows
XP, and Windows 2003. Both x86 and x64 variants are provided. kvm-61
or later is needed in the host. At the moment only
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 15:52 +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
This is the second release of network drivers for Windows guests running
on a kvm host. The drivers are intended for Windows 2000 and Windows
XP, and Windows 2003. Both x86 and x64 variants are provided.
Dor Laor schrieb:
(...)
- PV Windows (network driver)
About 700Mb+-, there is currently extra copy that we need to omit.
Thanks for Anthony, we just have to change the driver.
- non-PV Windows
What do you mean? Other fully emulated nics like e1000?
It does not perform as pv but
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 17:49 +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Dor Laor schrieb:
(...)
- PV Windows (network driver)
About 700Mb+-, there is currently extra copy that we need to omit.
Thanks for Anthony, we just have to change the driver.
- non-PV Windows
What do you mean?
Dor Laor wrote:
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 17:49 +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Dor Laor schrieb:
(...)
- PV Windows (network driver)
About 700Mb+-, there is currently extra copy that we need to omit.
Thanks for Anthony, we just have to change the driver.
-
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 06:09:42PM +0300, Dor Laor wrote:
Do you have any performance numbers for networking to see how it
compares to the real hardware?
- Linux host (or: real Windows running on that host)
For host you can measure yourself but for Linux guest (to host) it
currently
Anthony Liguori schrieb:
(...)
So, a PV network driver can do about 700Mb/s, and an emulated NIC can
do about 600 Mb/s, Windows guest to host?
That would be about 20% improvement?
FWIW, virtio-net is much better with my patches applied. The difference
between the e1000 and
13 matches
Mail list logo
