Hi, I have been testing the unmodified_drivers from the latest xen-unstable on my FC6 machine and I have a couple of questions regarding the results. It seems that I only get accelerated network performance in one direction namely sends from the HVM guest. I used iperf to benchmark performance between the HVM guest and the FC6 Dom0: # HVM - No PV drivers # Sends: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0- 8.2 sec 17.8 MBytes 18.3 Mbits/sec Receive: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 54.9 MBytes 46.0 Mbits/sec # HVM - with PV net driver # Sends: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 788 MBytes 660 Mbits/sec Receives [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 8.52 MBytes 7.13 Mbits/sec As you can see the PV driver improves network performance when sending from the HVM guest (FC6 - 2.6.18) but if anything the receive/read performance is worse than when using the ioemu rtl1839 driver. Is this expected behaviour? Does it matter that I''m running xen-3.0.3 but using the xen-unstable umodified_drivers source? xen-unstable has support for building against the 2.6.18 kernel whereas 3.0.3 does not. Is this message on start-up normal?: "netfront: device eth1 has copying recieve path". From what I''ve read the PV drivers for Linux should accelerate performance in both directions.... Here''s my vif config line: vif = [ ''bridge=xenbr0'' , ''type=ioemu, bridge=xenbr0'' ] I boot a "diskless" FC6 image from the network using pxe (etherboot for the rtl1839) and then load the unmodifed_drivers modules and bring up the network on eth1 (eth0 being the ioemu rtl1839). Am I doing anything wrong or is this expected behaviour? As an aside I tried building the unmodified_drivers against the FC3 2.6.12 kernel but they just hang on loading "xenbus.ko" - another known issue? Any help or hints greatly appreciated! Regards, Daire _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
----- "Daire Byrne" <Daire.Byrne@framestore-cfc.com> wrote:> As an aside I tried > building the unmodified_drivers against the FC3 2.6.12 kernel but they > just hang on loading "xenbus.ko" - another known issue?On further investigation the xenbus.ko hangs on the insmod when the HVM guest kernel is 32bit. So Fedora 6 64bit PV drivers load fine on a FC6 64bit Dom0 but when loading a 32bit FC6 kernel/image xenbus.ko hangs. A known issue? Regards, Daire _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Hi, I have been testing the unmodified_drivers from xen-unstable on my FC6 machine and I have a couple of questions regarding the results. It seems that I only get accelerated network performance in one direction namely sends from the HVM guest. I used iperf to benchmark performance between the HVM guest and the FC6 Dom0: HVM - No PV drivers Sends: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 54.9 MBytes 46.0 Mbits/sec Receives: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0- 8.2 sec 17.8 MBytes 18.3 Mbits/sec HVM - with PV net driver Sends: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 788 MBytes 660 Mbits/sec Receives: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 8.52 MBytes 7.13 Mbits/sec As you can see the PV driver improves network performance when sending from the HVM guest (FC6 - 2.6.18) but if anything the receive/read performance is worse than when using the ioemu rtl1839 driver. Is this expected behaviour? Does it matter that I''m running xen-3.0.3 but using the xen-unstable umodified_drivers source? xen-unstable has support for building against the 2.6.18 kernel whereas 3.0.3 does not. Is this message on start-up normal?: "netfront: device eth1 has copying receive path". From what I''ve read the PV drivers for Linux should accelerate performance in both directions.... Here''s my vif config line: vif = [ ''bridge=xenbr0'' , ''type=ioemu, bridge=xenbr0'' ] I boot a "diskless" FC6 image from the network using pxe (etherboot for the rtl1839) and then load the unmodifed_drivers modules and bring up the network on eth1 (eth0 being the ioemu rtl1839). Am I doing anything wrong or is this performance expected behaviour? Also I tried building the unmodified_drivers against both 32bit and 64bit guest FC6 kernels/images - they work fine with 64bit Dom0 & 64bit HVM guests but with a 64bit Dom0 and 32bit HVM guest the "xenbus.ko" module hangs on the insmod - another known issue/limitation? Any help or hints greatly appreciated! Regards, Daire _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Hi, (posted on xen-users but maybe this list is more appropriate?) I have been testing the unmodified_drivers from xen-unstable on my FC6 machine and I have a couple of questions regarding the results. It seems that I only get accelerated network performance in one direction namely sends from the HVM guest. I used iperf to benchmark performance between the HVM guest and the FC6 Dom0: HVM - No PV drivers Sends: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 54.9 MBytes 46.0 Mbits/sec Receives: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0- 8.2 sec 17.8 MBytes 18.3 Mbits/sec HVM - with PV net driver Sends: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 788 MBytes 660 Mbits/sec Receives: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 8.52 MBytes 7.13 Mbits/sec As you can see the PV driver improves network performance when sending from the HVM guest (FC6 - 2.6.18) but if anything the receive/read performance is worse than when using the ioemu rtl1839 driver. Is this expected behaviour? Does it matter that I''m running xen-3.0.3 but using the xen-unstable umodified_drivers source? xen-unstable has support for building against the 2.6.18 kernel whereas 3.0.3 does not. Is this message on start-up normal?: "netfront: device eth1 has copying receive path". From what I''ve read the PV drivers for Linux should accelerate performance in both directions.... Here''s my vif config line: vif = [ ''bridge=xenbr0'' , ''type=ioemu, bridge=xenbr0'' ] I boot a "diskless" FC6 image from the network using pxe (etherboot for the rtl1839) and then load the unmodifed_drivers modules and bring up the network on eth1 (eth0 being the ioemu rtl1839). Am I doing anything wrong or is this performance expected behaviour? Also I tried building the unmodified_drivers against both 32bit and 64bit guest FC6 kernels/images - they work fine with 64bit Dom0 & 64bit HVM guests but with a 64bit Dom0 and 32bit HVM guest the "xenbus.ko" module hangs on the insmod - another known issue/limitation? Any help or hints greatly appreciated! Regards, Daire _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel