Hi Stephen,
Benjamin forwarded me your email stating:
I have been playing with userspace-rcu which has a number of neat
lockless routines for queuing and hashing. But there aren't kernel versions
and several of them may require cmpxchg to work.
Just FYI, I made sure a few years ago that
I have been playing with userspace-rcu which has a number of neat
lockless routines for queuing and hashing. But there aren't kernel versions
and several of them may require cmpxchg to work.
___
Virtualization mailing list
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:23:17 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:34:42AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:07 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 02:25:17PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
On
jason wang jasow...@redhat.com wrote on 11/16/2011 11:40:45 AM:
Hi Jason,
Have any thought in mind to solve the issue of flow handling?
So far nothing concrete.
Maybe some performance numbers first is better, it would let us know
where we are. During the test of my patchset, I find big
On 11/16/2011 05:09 PM, Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
jason wang jasow...@redhat.com wrote on 11/16/2011 11:40:45 AM:
Hi Jason,
Have any thought in mind to solve the issue of flow handling?
So far nothing concrete.
Maybe some performance numbers first is better, it would let us know
where we are.
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 10:14 +0530, Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote on 11/14/2011 03:45:40 PM:
Why both the bandwidth and latency performance are dropping so
dramatically with multiple VQ?
It looks like theres no hash sync between host and guest, which
On 11/15/2011 12:44 PM, Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote on 11/14/2011 03:45:40 PM:
Why both the bandwidth and latency performance are dropping so
dramatically with multiple VQ?
It looks like theres no hash sync between host and guest, which makes
the RX VQ
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:34:42AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:07 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 02:25:17PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Asias He asias.he...@gmail.com wrote:
Why both the
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 10:04 +0800, Asias He wrote:
Hi, Shsha
On 11/13/2011 11:00 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 12:24 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:12:01AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
This is a patch based on Krishna Kumar's patch series which
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 02:25:17PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Asias He asias.he...@gmail.com wrote:
Why both the bandwidth and latency performance are dropping so dramatically
with multiple VQ?
What's the expected benefit from multiple VQs
Heh, the
Hi, Shsha
On 11/13/2011 11:00 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 12:24 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:12:01AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
This is a patch based on Krishna Kumar's patch series which implements
multiple VQ support for virtio-net.
The patch
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Asias He asias.he...@gmail.com wrote:
Why both the bandwidth and latency performance are dropping so dramatically
with multiple VQ?
What's the expected benefit from multiple VQs i.e. why are doing the
patches Sasha?
Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote on 11/14/2011 03:45:40 PM:
Why both the bandwidth and latency performance are dropping so
dramatically with multiple VQ?
It looks like theres no hash sync between host and guest, which makes
the RX VQ change for every packet. This is my guess.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:12:01AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
This is a patch based on Krishna Kumar's patch series which implements
multiple VQ support for virtio-net.
The patch was tested with ver3 of the patch.
Cc: Krishna Kumar krkum...@in.ibm.com
Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 12:24 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:12:01AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
This is a patch based on Krishna Kumar's patch series which implements
multiple VQ support for virtio-net.
The patch was tested with ver3 of the patch.
Cc:
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 17:00 +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 12:24 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:12:01AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
This is a patch based on Krishna Kumar's patch series which implements
multiple VQ support for virtio-net.
16 matches
Mail list logo
