(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 at igel.co.jp] >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 12:39 PM >>> To: Ouyang, Changchun; dev at dpdk.org >>> Cc: Xie, Huawei; Katsuya MATSUBARA; nakajima.yoshihiro at 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 at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Xie, Huawei >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 7:06 PM >>>> To: dev at 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
