qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 5/5] virtio-net: Switch default to new bottom ha


From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 5/5] virtio-net: Switch default to new bottom half TX handler for iothread
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:46:25 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100713 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.6

On 08/31/2010 05:32 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 23:25 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 04:37:45PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
The bottom half handler shows big improvements over the timer
with few downsides, default to it when the iothread is enabled.

Using the following tests, with the guest and host connected
via tap+bridge:

guest>  netperf -t TCP_STREAM -H $HOST
host>  netperf -t TCP_STREAM -H $GUEST
guest>  netperf -t UDP_STREAM -H $HOST
host>  netperf -t UDP_STREAM -H $GUEST
guest>  netperf -t TCP_RR -H $HOST

Results: base throughput, exits/throughput ->
                    patched throughput, exits/throughput

--enable-io-thread
TCP guest->host 2737.77, 47.82  ->  6767.09, 29.15 = 247%, 61%
TCP host->guest 2231.33, 74.00  ->  4125.80, 67.61 = 185%, 91%
UDP guest->host 6281.68, 14.66  ->  12569.27, 1.98 = 200%, 14%
UDP host->guest 275.91,  289.22 ->  264.80, 293.53 = 96%, 101%
interations/s   1949.65, 82.97  ->  7417.56, 84.31 = 380%, 102%

No --enable-io-thread
TCP guest->host 3041.57, 55.11 ->  1038.93, 517.57 = 34%, 939%
TCP host->guest 2416.03, 76.67 ->  5655.92, 55.52  = 234%, 72%
UDP guest->host 12255.82, 6.11 ->  7775.87, 31.32  = 63%, 513%
UDP host->guest 587.92, 245.95 ->  611.88, 239.92  = 104%, 98%
interations/s   1975.59, 83.21 ->  8935.50, 88.18  = 452%, 106%

Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson<address@hidden>
parameter having different settings based on config
options might surprise some users. I don't think
we really need a parameter here ...
I'm not a bit fan of this either, but I'd also prefer not to introduce a
regression for a performance difference we know about in advance.  It
gets even more complicated when we factor in qemu-kvm, as it doesn't
build with iothread enabled, but seems to get and even better boost in
performance across the board thanks largely to the kvm-irqchip.  Should
we instead make this a configure option?  --enable-virtio-net-txbh?

No, at this stage, we should ignore no --enable-io-thread with -enable-kvm.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Thanks,

Alex

---

  hw/s390-virtio-bus.c |    3 ++-
  hw/syborg_virtio.c   |    3 ++-
  hw/virtio-pci.c      |    3 ++-
  hw/virtio.h          |    6 ++++++
  4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/s390-virtio-bus.c b/hw/s390-virtio-bus.c
index 1483362..985f99a 100644
--- a/hw/s390-virtio-bus.c
+++ b/hw/s390-virtio-bus.c
@@ -328,7 +328,8 @@ static VirtIOS390DeviceInfo s390_virtio_net = {
      .qdev.size = sizeof(VirtIOS390Device),
      .qdev.props = (Property[]) {
          DEFINE_NIC_PROPERTIES(VirtIOS390Device, nic),
-        DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("txtimer", VirtIOS390Device, txtimer, 1),
+        DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("txtimer", VirtIOS390Device, txtimer,
+                           TXTIMER_DEFAULT),
          DEFINE_PROP_INT32("txburst", VirtIOS390Device, txburst, 256),
          DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST(),
      },
diff --git a/hw/syborg_virtio.c b/hw/syborg_virtio.c
index 7b76972..ee5746d 100644
--- a/hw/syborg_virtio.c
+++ b/hw/syborg_virtio.c
@@ -300,7 +300,8 @@ static SysBusDeviceInfo syborg_virtio_net_info = {
      .qdev.props = (Property[]) {
          DEFINE_NIC_PROPERTIES(SyborgVirtIOProxy, nic),
          DEFINE_VIRTIO_NET_FEATURES(SyborgVirtIOProxy, host_features),
-        DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("txtimer", SyborgVirtIOProxy, txtimer, 1),
+        DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("txtimer", SyborgVirtIOProxy, txtimer,
+                           TXTIMER_DEFAULT),
          DEFINE_PROP_INT32("txburst", SyborgVirtIOProxy, txburst, 256),
          DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST(),
      }
diff --git a/hw/virtio-pci.c b/hw/virtio-pci.c
index e025c09..9740f57 100644
--- a/hw/virtio-pci.c
+++ b/hw/virtio-pci.c
@@ -695,7 +695,8 @@ static PCIDeviceInfo virtio_info[] = {
              DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("vectors", VirtIOPCIProxy, nvectors, 3),
              DEFINE_VIRTIO_NET_FEATURES(VirtIOPCIProxy, host_features),
              DEFINE_NIC_PROPERTIES(VirtIOPCIProxy, nic),
-            DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("txtimer", VirtIOPCIProxy, txtimer, 1),
+            DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("txtimer", VirtIOPCIProxy, txtimer,
+                               TXTIMER_DEFAULT),
              DEFINE_PROP_INT32("txburst", VirtIOPCIProxy, txburst, 256),
              DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST(),
          },
diff --git a/hw/virtio.h b/hw/virtio.h
index 4051889..a1a17a2 100644
--- a/hw/virtio.h
+++ b/hw/virtio.h
@@ -183,6 +183,12 @@ void virtio_update_irq(VirtIODevice *vdev);
  void virtio_bind_device(VirtIODevice *vdev, const VirtIOBindings *binding,
                          void *opaque);

+#ifdef CONFIG_IOTHREAD
+ #define TXTIMER_DEFAULT 0
+#else
+ #define TXTIMER_DEFAULT 1
+#endif
+
Add a comment explaning that this is just a performance optimization?

  /* Base devices.  */
  VirtIODevice *virtio_blk_init(DeviceState *dev, BlockConf *conf);
  VirtIODevice *virtio_net_init(DeviceState *dev, NICConf *conf,

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to address@hidden
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]