013: Efficient and Scalable Virtio (by Abel Gordon)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EyweibHfEs
and
https://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@vger.kernel.org/msg98179.html
Comments are welcome,
Thank you,
Razya
From: Razya Ladelsky
Add an optional polling mode to continuously poll the virtqueues
for
Jason Wang wrote on 23/07/2014 08:26:36 AM:
> From: Jason Wang
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S.
> Tsirkin" ,
> Cc: abel.gor...@gmail.com, Joel Nider/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Yossi
> Kuperman1/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Eran Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBM
kvm-ow...@vger.kernel.org wrote on 29/07/2014 04:30:34 AM:
> From: "Zhang Haoyu"
> To: "Jason Wang" , "Abel Gordon"
> ,
> Cc: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Eran Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Joel Nider/Haifa/IBM@I
"Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote on 29/07/2014 11:06:40 AM:
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, abel.gor...@gmail.com, Joel Nider/Haifa/
> IBM@IBMIL, Yossi Kuperman1/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Eran Raichstein/Haifa/
>
>
> Hmm there aren't a lot of numbers there :(. Speed increased by 33% but
> by how much? E.g. maybe you are getting from 1Mbyte/sec to 1.3,
> if so it's hard to get excited about it.
Netperf 1 VM: 1516 MB/sec -> 2046 MB/sec
and for 3 VMs: 4086 MB/sec -> 5545 MB/sec
> Some questions that come
kvm-ow...@vger.kernel.org wrote on 29/07/2014 03:40:18 PM:
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Cc: abel.gor...@gmail.com, Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Eran
> Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Joel Nider/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> kv
Resubmitting the patch in: http://marc.info/?l=kvm&m=140594903520308&w=2
after fixing the whitespaces issues.
Thank you,
Razya
>From f293e470b36ff9eb4910540c620315c418e4a8fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Razya Ladelsky
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 09:47:20 +0300
Subject: [PATCH]
From: Razya Ladelsky
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 09:47:20 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] vhost: Add polling mode
When vhost is waiting for buffers from the guest driver (e.g., more packets to
send in vhost-net's transmit queue), it normally goes to sleep and waits for the
guest to "kick"
"Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote on 12/08/2014 12:18:50 PM:
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> To: David Miller
> Cc: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Alex
> Glikson/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Eran Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Yossi
> Kuperman1/Haifa/IB
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > Sorry for the delay, had some problems with my mailbox, and I realized
> > just now that
> > my reply wasn't sent.
> > The vm indeed ALWAYS utilized 100% cpu, whether polling was enabled or
> > not.
> > The vhost thread utilized less than 100% (of the other cpu) w
> That was just one example. There many other possibilities. Either
> actually make the systems load all host CPUs equally, or divide
> throughput by host CPU.
>
The polling patch adds this capability to vhost, reducing costly exit
overhead when the vm is loaded.
In order to load the vm I ran
own when I tested with 3 vms running
netperf
> > (4086 MB/sec -> 5545 MB/sec).
> >
> > filebench, 1 vm:
> > ops/sec improved by 13% with the polling patch. Number of exits
> was reduced by
> > 31%.
> > The same experiment with 3 vms running filebench showe
en I tested with 3 vms running
netperf
> > (4086 MB/sec -> 5545 MB/sec).
> >
> > filebench, 1 vm:
> > ops/sec improved by 13% with the polling patch. Number of exits
> was reduced by
> > 31%.
> > The same experiment with 3 vms running filebench s
David Laight wrote on 21/08/2014 05:29:41 PM:
> From: David Laight
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> Cc: "abel.gor...@gmail.com" , Alex Glikson/
> Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Eran Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Joel Nider/Haifa/
> IBM@IBMIL, &q
Hi Michael,
Following the polling patch thread:
http://marc.info/?l=kvm&m=140853271510179&w=2,
I changed poll_stop_idle to be counted in micro seconds, and carried out
experiments using varying sizes of this value. The setup for netperf consisted
of
1 vm and 1 vhost , each running on their ow
"Zhang Haoyu" wrote on 30/10/2014 01:30:08 PM:
> From: "Zhang Haoyu"
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, "mst"
> Cc: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, "kvm"
> Date: 30/10/2014 01:30 PM
> Subject: Re: Benchmarking for vhost polling patch
Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL wrote on 29/10/2014 02:38:31 PM:
> From: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> To: m...@redhat.com
> Cc: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Eran Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Yossi Kuperman1/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Joel Nider/
Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL wrote on 29/10/2014 02:38:31 PM:
> From: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> To: m...@redhat.com
> Cc: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Eran Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Yossi Kuperman1/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Joel Nider/
Hi Michael,
> Hi Razya,
> On the netperf benchmark, it looks like polling=10 gives a modest but
> measureable gain. So from that perspective it might be worth it if it's
> not too much code, though we'll need to spend more time checking the
> macro effect - we barely moved the needle on the macro
Hi all,
I am Razya Ladelsky, I work at IBM Haifa virtualization team, which
developed Elvis, presented by Abel Gordon at the last KVM forum:
ELVIS video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EyweibHfEs
ELVIS slides: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzyAwvVlQckeQmpnOHM5SnB5UVE
According to the
"Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote on 24/11/2013 12:26:15 PM:
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, anth...@codemonkey.ws, g...@redhat.com,
> pbonz...@redhat.com, as...@redhat.com, jasow...@redhat.com,
&g
Hi,
Thank you all for your comments.
I'm sorry for taking this long to reply, I was away on vacation..
It was a good, long discussion, many issues were raised, which we'd like
to address with the following proposed roadmap for Elvis patches.
In general, we believe it would be best to start with
Hi,
To summarize the issues raised and following steps:
1. Shared vhost thread will support multiple vms, while supporting
cgroups.
As soon as we have a design to support cgroups with multiple vms, we'll
share it.
2. Adding vhost polling mode: this patch can be submitted independently
from (
Gleb Natapov wrote on 24/12/2013 06:21:03 PM:
> From: Gleb Natapov
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , abel.gor...@gmail.com,
> Anthony Liguori , as...@redhat.com,
> digitale...@google.com, Eran Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
Razya
- Forwarded by Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM on 01/01/2015 09:37 AM -
From: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
To: m...@redhat.com
Cc:
Date: 25/11/2014 02:43 PM
Subject:Re: Benchmarking for vhost polling patch
Sent by:kvm-ow...@vger.kernel.org
Hi Michael,
> Hi Raz
> Hi Razya,
> Thanks for the update.
> So that's reasonable I think, and I think it makes sense
> to keep working on this in isolation - it's more
> manageable at this size.
>
> The big questions in my mind:
> - What happens if system is lightly loaded?
> E.g. a ping/pong benchmark. How much ext
"Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote on 12/01/2015 12:36:13 PM:
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Eran Raichstein/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL,
> Yossi Kuperman1/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, Joel Nider/Haifa/IBM@IBMI
> >
> > Our suggestion would be to use the maximum (a large enough) value,
> > so that vhost is polling 100% of the time.
> >
> > The polling optimization mainly addresses users who want to maximize
their
> > performance, even on the expense of wasting cpu cycles. The maximum
value
> > will pr
28 matches
Mail list logo
