On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 10:06:41AM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > On Freitag, 25. September 2020 00:10:23 CEST Vivek Goyal wrote: > > In my testing, with cache=none, virtiofs performed better than 9p in > > all the fio jobs I was running. For the case of cache=auto for virtiofs > > (with xattr enabled), 9p performed better in certain write workloads. I > > have identified root cause of that problem and working on > > HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2 patches to improve WRITE performance of virtiofs > > with cache=auto and xattr enabled. > > Please note, when it comes to performance aspects, you should set a > reasonable > high value for 'msize' on 9p client side: > https://wiki.qemu.org/Documentation/9psetup#msize
Hi Christian, I am not able to set msize to a higher value. If I try to specify msize 16MB, and then read back msize from /proc/mounts, it sees to cap it at 512000. Is that intended? $ mount -t 9p -o trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L,cache=none,msize=16777216 hostShared /mnt/virtio-9p $ cat /proc/mounts | grep 9p hostShared /mnt/virtio-9p 9p rw,sync,dirsync,relatime,access=client,msize=512000,trans=virtio 0 0 I am using 5.11 kernel. Thanks Vivek
