From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com (mail-pa0-f48.google.com [209.85.220.48]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 602A75942 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 07:54:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id et14so24752709pad.35 for ; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 22:58:31 -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=xtSmKAUzVh0ml+3xiEiK9kTnnrOx0FWZ+WMczOV7qMY=; b=BWgnvIGc2u4VynpHAnM1GNmwcU2SgAiqss0cfebEaUNOSzfiLoc104GY0ByCgVrTQo jd6xwsXWAD+hRtasXNt/SaCZiL3ayaozmuFvjtnOWmbUQ3J1j37S+pT24xBHXmxNPnOX c42Hs/pwRoqPEn3+pP3joTV/JUO/3ofnq2i+Vg9OO6kCO4BqPnUWqws8AM31S33unHGY yZKS97oxaW2pJpWIWXWf+ahCeDbvNwlo+bC8QTyeuJvsdWAfj3IQ+JC8gN+OJnqHvGtj Ou7T4rMyu8uY6Iw0qYKg/EG0uhdM/GBUMNLESGM8QV0CGk4SL9rk7Pxmdgdpp+k2edFQ mZ/w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkn3NAZeCsn86cAlxIYPD81YhK46cU7XbUUweK5TWorIq5o8P0NaX6o/hGlUgorDX8k/d7h X-Received: by 10.66.66.35 with SMTP id c3mr422338pat.108.1409119111534; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 22:58:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.16.129.101] (napt.igel.co.jp. [219.106.231.132]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id na5sm5047159pbc.22.2014.08.26.22.58.29 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Aug 2014 22:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53FD7384.3050209@igel.co.jp> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 14:58:28 +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: <53FD60FD.5090903@igel.co.jp> <53FD6C4E.5040907@igel.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <53FD6C4E.5040907@igel.co.jp> 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 05:54:29 -0000 (2014/08/27 14:27), Tetsuya.Mukawa wrote: > Hi Changchun, > > (2014/08/27 14:01), Ouyang, Changchun wrote: >> Agree with you, the performance should be same as the data path (RX/TX) is not affected, >> The difference between implementation only exists in the virtio device creation and destroy stage. > Yes, I agree. Also There may be the difference, if a virtio-net driver > on a guest isn't poll mode like a virtio-net device driver in the > kernel. In the case, existing vhost implementation uses the eventfd > kernel module, and vhost-user implementation uses eventfd to kick the > driver. So I guess there will be the difference. > > Anyway, about device creation and destruction, the difference will come > from transmission speed between unix domain socket and CUSE. I am not > sure which is faster. Thank for pointing out my misleading expression. Correct: transmission latency Incorrect: transmission speed Tetsuya, > > Thanks, > Tetsuya > > >> Regards, >> Changchun >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Tetsuya.Mukawa [mailto:mukawa@igel.co.jp] >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 12:39 PM >>> To: Ouyang, Changchun; dev@dpdk.org >>> Cc: Xie, Huawei; 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 >>> >>> >>> (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