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, « email@example.com au nom de Avi Cohen (A) »
<firstname.lastname@example.org 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)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Ray
> Sent: Friday, 16 February, 2018 4:52 PM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VPP vs XDP-eBPF performance numbers - for linux
> Hi Avi,
> So the "not compatible" comment is something I would like to understand a
> 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
> 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
> 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.
> Ray K
> On 13/02/2018 14:04, Avi Cohen (A) wrote:
> > Hello
> > Are there 'numbers' for performance - VPP vs XDP-eBPF for container
> > 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