From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com (mail-pa0-f51.google.com [209.85.220.51]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2265D38EB for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 06:35:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id ey11so25230912pad.10 for ; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 21:39:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=XKzGwTHVSR+qzAECXHGZ1tuQE7lI1wM5eGLwQeMLoMw=; b=LIIfp/3bBioyqFB1euxu03rc7AxYQg9IBNhNyWiBeUpdTXBwF/qLUKgHMFF+kJZchF dVgzYxbHEqoe3ILu3ZAIcaUXHjj8FUbmYm3+WjBAPlyrG5hb8Hcs3ApiN96TgiB2BdjY x7Zq20l9TVJxK4A4Gw8jBXss4TpD/M5Gr3kREEtMMh/cxq5Un57tlTVXwjqE7H/rE+wl yRmTkcmISNsxUWnlbJJCYSpAHlNzvUcJ58IbRMhK+1UNIMuF54qmXyH4bVG5G4Dj970m nZmtAlBlBdMU4sGeWWl0PYeG917HU6HAeMqAr2jYQqDmPY8vk62VxWQVMgkCR05LhocT k3Fw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkNYpj0HYh4s1fHdVwvv59neN51WA6th1ForVASkk1nKOrR6ZN/3hNxpD2J0WCHni2neeWv X-Received: by 10.66.136.48 with SMTP id px16mr42596609pab.10.1409114368763; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 21:39:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.16.129.101] (napt.igel.co.jp. [219.106.231.132]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id rk2sm5059422pbc.1.2014.08.26.21.39.27 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Aug 2014 21:39:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53FD60FD.5090903@igel.co.jp> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 13:39:25 +0900 From: "Tetsuya.Mukawa" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Ouyang, Changchun" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Katsuya MATSUBARA , nakajima.yoshihiro@lab.ntt.co.jp, Hitoshi Masutani Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] lib/librte_vhost: qemu vhost-user support into DPDK vhost library X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 04:35:27 -0000 (2014/08/27 9:43), Ouyang, Changchun wrote: > Do we have performance comparison between both implementation? Hi Changchun, If DPDK applications are running on both guest and host side, the performance should be almost same, because while transmitting data virt queues are accessed by virtio-net PMD and libvhost. In libvhost, the existing vhost implementation and a vhost-user implementation will shares or uses same code to access virt queues. So I guess the performance will be almost same. Thanks, Tetsuya > Thanks > Changchun > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Xie, Huawei > Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 7:06 PM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] lib/librte_vhost: qemu vhost-user support into DPDK vhost library > > Hi all: > We are implementing qemu official vhost-user interface into DPDK vhost library, so there would be two coexisting implementations for user space vhost backend. > Pro and cons in my mind: > Existing solution: > Pros: works with qemu version before 2.1; Cons: depends on eventfd proxy kernel module and extra maintenance effort Qemu vhost-user: > Pros: qemu official us-vhost interface; Cons: only available after qemu 2.1 > > BR. > huawei