From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailfilter01.viettel.com.vn (mailfilter01.viettel.com.vn [125.235.240.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD15F2BA7; Sat, 2 Mar 2019 12:14:55 +0100 (CET) DomainKey-Signature: s=dmsig1; d=viettel.com.vn; c=simple; q=dns; h=Authentication-Results:X-IronPort-AV:Received:Received: Received:Received:X-Virus-Scanned:Received:Received:To:Cc: Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer: Thread-Index:Content-Language:MilterAction:Date:From; b=m3vXHfpPXsrQHaSZBwIv7I+74iWkeYyOCiVVRVhmwcjpBLtx2pvXYv+X hMYL21KrfWOyM3KhJRQu9mPZahL58fKTy0kiAmXsn/9/KQ9/c1adlfJhB HxJmWZrTQ6mtnYI/cR1lmI+rsxqcnMLEx7bR8ncM/l6BMyXG/BUDCiBQF FRqDRHDqJxp/wVeoaTKXdigcoIXZv82asXDs6ve7qWRHol4x6xAjN7Qcm etdHJeId/JtgKJZDsAq9v1jUrVuMQhnL/vp1UzggS3kUxNWG571I0SBY1 dbBcltJgECEFB3N5Kc/DjOjqXWC9lAsK7IuvAmUuZt0v6JNgklNz7v8Cw Q==; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=viettel.com.vn; s=dkim1; t=1551525298; h=to:cc:subject:message-id:mime-version:date:from; bh=WWLOh9AHeZRdfSeV7eCwrJ7e1gv5dx4rJ27zHxJ/sNo=; b=XZhZkwO/JJ0xRaJTON+aIwXf/vBT7B2UTLtk2K8Ut0aRIyTn1livoDHR s8dfWvaERzodE+bskgFwHC+Kk6bQPBPbTW1WWnUCOdfMVSCXt3QKRLh+d hvyGfiMsTi/d7u1V1U6S3aMHcCZltDOAOrOpgccwXuRFxKWrecbiq8dpj at+qDyz/+CdlkdvkBczdT4n54ZS/iVgUYRwj1kcvP2dXQxzdzAuR1NdYn vY9yD64c8iRe/sKPv8t5e+ggnhjGm8959Onk809UaSembDwA4mh1JhLnO qDfIOh8NW0+yk8WicsqMI3oQIYMnfWlKFgMETt9QaqaiRBndcAn861fyy Q==; Authentication-Results: mailfilter01.viettel.com.vn; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=longtb5@viettel.com.vn; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) d=viettel.com.vn X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,253,1539622800"; d="scan'208,217";a="134161906" Received: from 125.235.240.44.adsl.viettel.vn (HELO mta1.viettel.com.vn) ([125.235.240.44]) by mailfilter01.viettel.com.vn with ESMTP; 02 Mar 2019 18:14:52 +0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mta1.viettel.com.vn (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66FF60D76C; Sat, 2 Mar 2019 18:14:52 +0700 (ICT) Received: from mta1.viettel.com.vn ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta1.viettel.com.vn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id Z9oER6vUiNLo; Sat, 2 Mar 2019 18:14:52 +0700 (ICT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mta1.viettel.com.vn (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6EE660D78E; Sat, 2 Mar 2019 18:14:52 +0700 (ICT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at Received: from mta1.viettel.com.vn ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta1.viettel.com.vn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id YvjLzNb3ZqDa; Sat, 2 Mar 2019 18:14:52 +0700 (ICT) Received: from ANMLONGTB5 (unknown [27.68.241.28]) by mta1.viettel.com.vn (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6505060D791; Sat, 2 Mar 2019 18:14:52 +0700 (ICT) To: , Cc: Message-ID: <004501d4d0ea$aadef490$009cddb0$@viettel.com.vn> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AdTQ6T3qU1OOEsYmQueRm59dArse/g== Content-Language: en-us MilterAction: FORWARD Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2019 18:14:52 +0700 (ICT) From: longtb5@viettel.com.vn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-users] Virtio / Vhost-user alternative X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2019 11:14:58 -0000 Hi everyone, Suppose QEMU and DPDK support is not a requirement, is there any alternative that could theoretically outperform virtio/vhost-user? I'm asking this weird question because the existing virtio/vhost-user interface, while regarded as the de facto path to VM, is currently one of the major bottlenecks in virtual switching system. How should one go about sending traffic as fast as possible from host to VM without utilizing hardware-based solutions such as SRIOV? Best regards, -BL