On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:16 PM Stephen Hemminger < step...@networkplumber.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:02:53 -0500 > Jay Rolette <role...@infinite.io> wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 1:11 PM Stephen Hemminger < > > step...@networkplumber.org> wrote: > > > > > I wonder if KNI is claiming performance that was never measured on > current > > > CPU, OS, DPDK. > > > > > > With single stream and TCP testing on IXGBE (DPDK), I see lowest > > > performance with KNI. > > > > > > Rx Tx > > > KNI 3.2 Gbit/sec 1.3 Gbit/sec > > > TAP 4.9 4.7 > > > Virtio 5.6 8.6 > > > > > > Perhaps for 18.11 we should change documentation to remove language > > > claiming > > > better performance with KNI, and then plan for future deprecation? > > > > > > > Do TAP and Virtio provide equivalent function to KNI? I can't speak for > any > > other products, but ours is dependent on KNI. The ability for control > plane > > applications to use normal Linux sockets with DPDK is key even if it > isn't > > performant. > > > > Hopefully the answer is "yes", in which case I'll happily port over to > > using one of the faster mechanisms. > > > > Thanks, > > Jay > > See: > > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides-17.11/howto/virtio_user_as_exceptional_path.html Thanks. Looks like it's time to run some experiments again. Jay
