[PATCH 0/6] virtio_add_buf replacement.

Asias He
Wed, 06 Mar 2013 08:09:41 -0000

On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:15:02PM +1100, Rusty Russell
wrote:
> OK, so I've spent a few days benchmarking.  Turns out 80% of
> virtio_add_buf cases are uni-directional (including the
> always-performance-sensitive networking code), and that gets no
> performance penalty (though tests with real networking would be
> appreciated!).
>
> I'm not reposting all the "convert driver to
virtio_add_outbuf()"
> patches: just the scsi one which I didn't have before.  I won't
actually
> remove virtio_add_buf() until the *following* merge window, just to be
> sure.

Why not send out all the patches in this series? It would be much easier
for people to read in one thread.

> One annoying thing about benchmarking is that in some cases, speeding up
> one side can make the whole thing slower, due to more wakeups.
> Device-side polling techniques might be required in future to get more
> performance.
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty.
> _______________________________________________
> Virtualization mailing list
> Virtualization at lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

--
Asias