* Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Hi Ingo,
>
> On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 08:59:20AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Joerg Roedel wrote:
>
> > > The problem solved here is that someone wants tboot for security
> > > reasons, but doesn't want the performance penalty of having the IOMMU
> > > enabled and ca
Hi Ingo,
On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 08:59:20AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > The problem solved here is that someone wants tboot for security
> > reasons, but doesn't want the performance penalty of having the IOMMU
> > enabled and can live with the risk of an DMA attack.
>
* Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 08:51:42AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > + tboot_noforce [Default Off]
> > > + Do not force the Intel IOMMU enabled under tboot.
> > > + By default, tboot will force Intel IOMMU on, which
> > > +
Hi Ingo,
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 08:52:53AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Applied, thanks.
>
> Please don't apply it yet, I posted a few review questions.
Are your questions answered with the replies by me and Shaohua?
Joerg
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 08:41:20AM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote:
> Sorry, I wrote the wrong data. With iommu the pps is 6M pps, and without it,
> we
> can get around 20M pps. XDP is much faster than normal network workloads. The
> test uses 64 bytes. We tried other sizes in the machine (not 8 bytes tho
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 05:18:55PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 07:49:02AM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > This is exactly the usage for us. And please note, not everybody should
> > sacrifice the DMA security. It is only required when the pcie device hits
> > iommu
> > hardwa
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 07:49:02AM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote:
> This is exactly the usage for us. And please note, not everybody should
> sacrifice the DMA security. It is only required when the pcie device hits
> iommu
> hardware limitation. In our enviroment, normal network workloads (as high as
>
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:42:07AM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 08:51:42AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > + tboot_noforce [Default Off]
> > > + Do not force the Intel IOMMU enabled under tboot.
> > > + By default, tboot will force Int
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 08:51:42AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > + tboot_noforce [Default Off]
> > + Do not force the Intel IOMMU enabled under tboot.
> > + By default, tboot will force Intel IOMMU on, which
> > + could harm performanc
* Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 09:18:35AM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > IOMMU harms performance signficantly when we run very fast networking
> > workloads. It's 40GB networking doing XDP test. Software overhead is
> > almost unaware, but it's the IOTLB miss (based on our analysi
* Shaohua Li wrote:
> IOMMU harms performance signficantly when we run very fast networking
> workloads. It's 40GB networking doing XDP test. Software overhead is
> almost unaware, but it's the IOTLB miss (based on our analysis) which
> kills the performance. We observed the same performance iss
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 09:18:35AM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote:
> IOMMU harms performance signficantly when we run very fast networking
> workloads. It's 40GB networking doing XDP test. Software overhead is
> almost unaware, but it's the IOTLB miss (based on our analysis) which
> kills the performance.
12 matches
Mail list logo
