Re: [Qemu-devel] The status about vhost-net on kvm-arm?

[Nikolay Nikolaev]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Nikolay Nikolaev
<address@hidden> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Nikolay Nikolaev
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:41 AM, Li Liu <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Is anyone there can tell the current status of vhost-net on kvm-arm?
>> >
>> > Half a year has passed from Isa Ansharullah asked this question:
>> > http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm-arm/msg08152.html
>> >
>> > I have found two patches which have provided the kvm-arm support of
>> > eventfd and irqfd:
>> >
>> > 1) [RFC PATCH 0/4] ARM: KVM: Enable the ioeventfd capability of KVM on ARM
>> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-01/msg01770.html
>> >
>> > 2) [RFC,v3] ARM: KVM: add irqfd and irq routing support
>> > https://patches.linaro.org/32261/
>> >
>> > And there's a rough patch for qemu to support eventfd from Ying-Shiuan Pan:
>> >
>> > [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] ioeventfd support for virtio-mmio
>> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-02/msg00715.html
>> >
>> > But there no any comments of this patch. And I can found nothing about qemu
>> > to support irqfd. Do I lost the track?
>> >
>> > If nobody try to fix it. We have a plan to complete it about virtio-mmio
>> > supporing irqfd and multiqueue.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> we at Virtual Open Systems did some work and tested vhost-net on ARM
>> back in March.
>> The setup was based on:
>>  - host kernel with our ioeventfd patches:
>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm-arm/msg08413.html
>>
>> - qemu with the aforementioned patches from Ying-Shiuan Pan
>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-02/msg00715.html
>>
>> The testbed was ARM Chromebook with Exynos 5250, using a 1Gbps USB3
>> Ethernet adapter connected to a 1Gbps switch. I can't find the actual
>> numbers but I remember that with multiple streams the gain was clearly
>> seen. Note that it used the minimum required ioventfd implementation
>> and not irqfd.
>>
>> I guess it is feasible to think that it all can be put together and
>> rebased + the recent irqfd work. One can achiev even better
>> performance (because of the irqfd).
>>
>
> Managed to replicate the setup with the old versions e used in March:
>
> Single stream from another machine to chromebook with 1Gbps USB3
> Ethernet adapter.
> iperf -c <address> -P 1 -i 1 -p 5001 -f k -t 10
> to HOST: 858316 Kbits/sec
> to GUEST: 761563 Kbits/sec
to GUEST vhost=off: 508150 Kbits/sec
>
> 10 parallel streams
> iperf -c <address> -P 10 -i 1 -p 5001 -f k -t 10
> to HOST: 842420 Kbits/sec
> to GUEST: 625144 Kbits/sec
to GUEST vhost=off: 425276 Kbits/sec
>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > kvmarm mailing list
>> > address@hidden
>> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
>>
>>
>> regards,
>> Nikolay Nikolaev
>> Virtual Open Systems