similar to: [PATCH V2 2/6] kvm: detect assigned device via irqbypass manager

On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:49:21PM +0800, Zhu Lingshan wrote: > We used to detect assigned device via VFIO manipulated device > conters. This is less flexible consider VFIO is not the only > interface for assigned device. vDPA devices has dedicated > backed hardware as well. So this patch tries to detect > the assigned device via irqbypass manager. > > We will

On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:49:21PM +0800, Zhu Lingshan wrote: > We used to detect assigned device via VFIO manipulated device > conters. This is less flexible consider VFIO is not the only > interface for assigned device. vDPA devices has dedicated > backed hardware as well. So this patch tries to detect > the assigned device via irqbypass manager. > > We will

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 22:49:21 +0800 Zhu Lingshan <lingshan.zhu at intel.com> wrote: > We used to detect assigned device via VFIO manipulated device > conters. This is less flexible consider VFIO is not the only > interface for assigned device. vDPA devices has dedicated > backed hardware as well. So this patch tries to detect > the assigned device via irqbypass manager. >

On 2020/7/13 ??5:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:49:21PM +0800, Zhu Lingshan wrote: >> We used to detect assigned device via VFIO manipulated device >> conters. This is less flexible consider VFIO is not the only >> interface for assigned device. vDPA devices has dedicated >> backed hardware as well. So this patch tries to detect >> the

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 08:52:43AM +0800, Zhu, Lingshan wrote: > > On 7/13/2020 6:52 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 04:13:35PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2020/7/13 ??5:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:49:21PM +0800, Zhu Lingshan wrote: > > We used to detect

On 2020/7/16 ??7:23, Zhu Lingshan wrote: > vDPA devices has dedicated backed hardware like > passthrough-ed devices. Then it is possible to setup irq > offloading to vCPU for vDPA devices. Thus this patch tries to > manipulated assigned device counters via irqbypass manager. This part needs some tweak, e.g why assigned device could be detected through this way. > > We will

This patchset implements the KVM part of the synthetic interrupt controller (synic) which is a building block of the Hyper-V paravirtualized device bus (vmbus). Synic is a lapic extension, which is controlled via MSRs and maintains for each vCPU - 16 synthetic interrupt "lines" (SINT's); each can be configured to trigger a specific interrupt vector optionally with auto-EOI

This patchset implements the KVM part of the synthetic interrupt controller (synic) which is a building block of the Hyper-V paravirtualized device bus (vmbus). Synic is a lapic extension, which is controlled via MSRs and maintains for each vCPU - 16 synthetic interrupt "lines" (SINT's); each can be configured to trigger a specific interrupt vector optionally with auto-EOI

This patchset implements the KVM part of the synthetic interrupt controller (SynIC) which is a building block of the Hyper-V paravirtualized device bus (vmbus). SynIC is a lapic extension, which is controlled via MSRs and maintains for each vCPU - 16 synthetic interrupt "lines" (SINT's); each can be configured to trigger a specific interrupt vector optionally with auto-EOI

This patchset implements the KVM part of the synthetic interrupt controller (SynIC) which is a building block of the Hyper-V paravirtualized device bus (vmbus). SynIC is a lapic extension, which is controlled via MSRs and maintains for each vCPU - 16 synthetic interrupt "lines" (SINT's); each can be configured to trigger a specific interrupt vector optionally with auto-EOI

Christian, the question for you is towards the end... On 09/10/2015 15:39, Denis V. Lunev wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c b/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c > index 62cf8c9..15c3c02 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c > @@ -23,13 +23,265 @@ > > #include "x86.h" > #include "lapic.h" > +#include "ioapic.h"

Christian, the question for you is towards the end... On 09/10/2015 15:39, Denis V. Lunev wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c b/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c > index 62cf8c9..15c3c02 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c > @@ -23,13 +23,265 @@ > > #include "x86.h" > #include "lapic.h" > +#include "ioapic.h"

Hi Shannon, >Type of backend bandwith(GBytes/sec) >virtio-net 0.66 >vhost-net 1.49 >vhost-net with irqfd 2.01 > >Test cmd: ./iperf -c 192.168.0.2 -P 1 -i 10 -p 5001 -f G -t 60 Impressive results ! Could you please detail your setup ? which platform are you using and which GbE controller ? As a reference, it would be good also to have

Hi Shannon, >Type of backend bandwith(GBytes/sec) >virtio-net 0.66 >vhost-net 1.49 >vhost-net with irqfd 2.01 > >Test cmd: ./iperf -c 192.168.0.2 -P 1 -i 10 -p 5001 -f G -t 60 Impressive results ! Could you please detail your setup ? which platform are you using and which GbE controller ? As a reference, it would be good also to have

On 10/27/2014 12:23 PM, Li Liu wrote: > > > On 2014/10/27 17:37, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 25 October 2014 09:24, john.liuli <john.liuli at huawei.com> wrote: >>> To get the interrupt reason to support such VIRTIO_NET_F_STATUS >>> features I add a new register offset VIRTIO_MMIO_ISRMEM which >>> will help to establish a shared memory region

On 10/27/2014 12:23 PM, Li Liu wrote: > > > On 2014/10/27 17:37, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 25 October 2014 09:24, john.liuli <john.liuli at huawei.com> wrote: >>> To get the interrupt reason to support such VIRTIO_NET_F_STATUS >>> features I add a new register offset VIRTIO_MMIO_ISRMEM which >>> will help to establish a shared memory region

From: Li Liu <john.liuli at huawei.com> This set of patches try to implemet irqfd support of vhost-net based on virtio-mmio. I had posted a mail to talking about the status of vhost-net on kvm-arm refer to http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm-arm/msg10804.html. Some dependent patches are listed in the mail too. Basically the vhost-net brings great performance improvements, almost 50%+.

From: Li Liu <john.liuli at huawei.com> This set of patches try to implemet irqfd support of vhost-net based on virtio-mmio. I had posted a mail to talking about the status of vhost-net on kvm-arm refer to http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm-arm/msg10804.html. Some dependent patches are listed in the mail too. Basically the vhost-net brings great performance improvements, almost 50%+.

On 2014/11/11 23:11, Pawel Moll wrote: > On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 09:35 +0000, Shannon Zhao wrote: >> As the current virtio-mmio only support single irq, >> so some advanced features such as vhost-net with irqfd >> are not supported. And the net performance is not >> the best without vhost-net and irqfd supporting. > > Could you, please, help understanding me where

On 2014/11/11 23:11, Pawel Moll wrote: > On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 09:35 +0000, Shannon Zhao wrote: >> As the current virtio-mmio only support single irq, >> so some advanced features such as vhost-net with irqfd >> are not supported. And the net performance is not >> the best without vhost-net and irqfd supporting. > > Could you, please, help understanding me where