On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 03:31:08PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:13:43AM +0800, lidong chen wrote: > > I test the performance between per-vhost kthread disable and enable. > > > > Test method: > > Send the same traffic load between per-vhost kthread disable and > > enable, and compare the cpu rate of host os. > > I run five vm on kvm, each of them have five nic. > > the vhost version which per-vhost kthread disable we used is rhel6 > > beta 2(2.6.32.60). > > the vhost version which per-vhost kthread enable we used is rhel6 > > (2.6.32-71). > > > > Test result: > > with per-vhost kthread disable, the cpu rate of host os is 110%. > > with per-vhost kthread enable, the cpu rate of host os is 130%. > > Does it help if we schedule out the thread once we've passed > once over all vqs?
Also, could you please check whether applying kvm: fast-path msi injection with irqfd makes any difference? That relieves the pressure on the scheduler by sending the interrupt directly from vhost without involving yet another thread. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
