[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [kvm-devel] [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/3] Refactor AIO interface to a
From: |
Jamie Lokier |
Subject: |
Re: [kvm-devel] [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/3] Refactor AIO interface to allow other AIO implementations |
Date: |
Fri, 2 May 2008 19:24:51 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> FWIW, in the process of optimizing the kernel driver for virtio-blk,
> I've found that using a no-op scheduler helps a fair bit. As long as
> you're using a reasonably sized ring, the back-end can merge adjacent
> requests. This also helps a fair bit too.
By 'back-end' do you mean the virtio-blk driver itself merges
requests?
I'm assuming yes, for these questions: Does it honour barriers
properly? Isn't that the job of the guest elevator? Does it suggest
the various guest I/O schedulers could be enhanced to operate directly
on requests in flight in the virtio ring?
Oh, one last thing. Is it plausible to write a Windows driver which
uses the virtio-blk interface, to get the best performing
Windows-in-KVM? (It's nice to be able to say Linux makes a good host
for Windows guests too.)
Thanks,
- Jamie