qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] Ideas wiki for GSoC 2010


From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Ideas wiki for GSoC 2010
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 08:55:57 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091209 Fedora/3.0-4.fc12 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0

On 03/15/2010 08:24 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 03:11:42PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 03/15/2010 03:03 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
I will add another project - iommu emulation.  Could be very useful
for doing device assignment to nested guests, which could make
testing a lot easier.

Our experiments show that nested device assignment is pretty much
required for I/O performance in nested scenarios.

Really? I did a small test with virtio-blk in a nested guest (disk read
with dd, so not a real benchmark) and got a reasonable read-performance
of around 25MB/s from the disk in the l2-guest.


Your guest wasn't doing a zillion VMREADs and VMWRITEs every exit.

I plan to reduce VMREAD/VMWRITE overhead for kvm, but not much we can do
for other guests.
Does it matter for the ept-on-ept case? The initial patchset of
nested-vmx implemented it and they reported a performance drop of around
12% between levels which is reasonable. So I expected the loss of
io-performance for l2 also reasonable in this case. My small measurement
was also done using npt-on-npt.

But that was something like kernbench IIRC which is actually exit light once ept is enabled.

Network IO is typically exit heavy and becomes something more of a pathological work load (both for nested ept and nested npt).

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

        Joerg

--
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]