Hi Avi,
As I already told you in a previous message. With tapv2, there's no longer copy 
from user to kernel (there's still kernel to user copy).

Le 19/02/2018 09:35, « vpp-dev@lists.fd.io au nom de Avi Cohen (A) » 
<vpp-dev@lists.fd.io au nom de avi.co...@huawei.com> a écrit :

    Thank  you Ray
    dpdk is not running in the container - this is customer container and I 
cannot force the customer to use dpdk.
    Regarding the  "not compatible"  - I mean pkts received at vpp user-space,  
destined to C1 (container) ,
    should be copied to the kernel and then to C1 IP-stack (e.g.  AF_PACKET 
interface )  , while this copy can be saved if my  vSwitch is running in kernel.
    So theoretically for the container networking use-case ,  vSwitch in kernel 
can  achieve better performance and CPU utilization than any vSwitch  over 
dpdk. (VPP or OvS) 
    Unless a memory map can be used here to save the copy (userspace to kernel 
and kernel to userspace)
    Best Regards
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io [mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of Ray 
    > Sent: Friday, 16 February, 2018 4:52 PM
    > To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
    > Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VPP vs XDP-eBPF performance numbers - for linux
    > containers
    > Hi Avi,
    > So the "not compatible" comment is something I would like to understand a 
    > more?
    > Are you typically running DPDK/VPP based or Socket based applications 
    > your containers?
    > Our perspective is that userspace networking is also equally good for
    > Container/Cloud Native - of course depending on what you are trying to 
do. We
    > have done a huge amount of work in both VPP and DPDK developing
    > technologies to help like MemIF (including libmemif), Virtio-User, 
    > Master-VM, Contiv-VPP etc to help in this regard.
    > What a container is - ultimately - is a silo'ing of CPU, memory and IO 
    > for both Kernel and Userspace processes, but there is nothing in this 
forces us
    > to choose Kernel over Userspace networking.
    > The way we typically handle Containers networking for both VPP/DPDK is for
    > packets to flow directly between userspace processes - no kernel required.
    > Where VPP runs in the default namespace possibly as a vSwitch or vRouter, 
    > switches packets to containers running DPDK/VPP etc, all achieved in
    > userspace. We also provide the Master-VM approach and/or FastTAP or
    > AF_PACKET to punt the packets into the Kernel when required.
    > We test the the performance of aspects of this such as Memif regularly -
    > results are available here.
    > ut_graphs/container_memif.html#ndr-throughput
    > Thanks,
    > Ray K
    > On 13/02/2018 14:04, Avi Cohen (A) wrote:
    > > Hello
    > > Are there 'numbers' for performance - VPP  vs XDP-eBPF for container
    > networking.
    > >
    > > Since the DPDK and linux-containers are not compatible, is a sense that
    > container and host share the same kernel - hence pkts received at VPP-DPDK
    > at user-space and directed to a linux container  - should be go   down to 
    > kernel and then to the container ip-stack, while in XDP-eBPF this pkt can 
    > forward to the container ip-stack directly from the kernel.
    > >
    > > I heard that a vhostuser interface for containers is 'in-working' stage.
    > > Can anyone assist with the performance numbers and the status of this 
    > user for containers ?
    > >
    > > Best Regards
    > > Avi
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >


You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#8252): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/8252
View All Messages In Topic (8): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/topic/11144798
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/11144798/21656
New Topic: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/post

Change Your Subscription: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/editsub/21656
Group Home: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev
Contact Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Terms of Service: https://lists.fd.io/static/tos
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub

Reply via email to