Hi Xie, (2014/08/27 14:56), Xie, Huawei wrote: > For virtio-net device driver, there is still no difference. Existing > solution creates an eventfd module to install a fd in DPDK process > pointing to the eventfd in qemu process. In vhost-user, the UNIX > domain socket will do that work, create a new fd, install it in target > DPDK server process, and make it point to the eventfd in qemu process. Thank you for explanation. I can understand clearly.
Thanks, Tetsuya >> 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. >> >> 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
