search for: 001076

...t;dovecot at dovecot.org> >Sent: Fri, Jun 11, 2010, 21:49 PM >Subject: Re: [Dovecot] Thunderbird namespace handling > >On to, 2010-06-10 at 18:18 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote: >> > See this thread: >> > http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/2010-May/001076.html >> >> I've read it but I still don't get the point : >> >> I thought "hidden = no" would advertise this namespace for clients >> which support NAMESPACE and that "list = yes" would allow clients which >> don't support NAMES...

...duces the number of MMIO writes which can result in a very large performance benefit in virtualized environments. See the following link for a description of the mechanism and the kernel NVMe driver changes to support this vendor extension: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-nvme/2014-July/001076.html On my workstation (3.2Ghz Xeon E5-1650), running QEMU: $ bin/opt/native/x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 \ -enable-kvm -m 2048 -smp 4 \ -drive if=virtio,file=debian.raw,cache=none \ -drive file=nvme.raw,if=none,id=nvme-dev \ -device nvme,drive=nvme-dev,serial=nvme-serial Usi...

Hi Rob & Mihai, I wrote vhost-nvme patches on top of Christoph's NVMe target. vhost-nvme still uses mmio. So the guest OS can run unmodified NVMe driver. But the tests I have done didn't show competitive performance compared to virtio-blk/virtio-scsi. The bottleneck is in mmio. Your nvme vendor extension patches reduces greatly the number of MMIO writes. So I'd like to push it

Hi Rob & Mihai, I wrote vhost-nvme patches on top of Christoph's NVMe target. vhost-nvme still uses mmio. So the guest OS can run unmodified NVMe driver. But the tests I have done didn't show competitive performance compared to virtio-blk/virtio-scsi. The bottleneck is in mmio. Your nvme vendor extension patches reduces greatly the number of MMIO writes. So I'd like to push it