Morgan
in the current ZC implementation you do not have to change anything in the 
guest or patch QEMU, but just load a kernel module (see 
https://svn.ntop.org/svn/ntop/trunk/PF_RING/userland/examples_zc/README.kvm 
<https://svn.ntop.org/svn/ntop/trunk/PF_RING/userland/examples_zc/README.kvm>).

The us-vhost approach is interesting and we might consider supporting it. But 
not in a month or two, as we’re actively working at other projects (see our 
blog) that we will start introducing this spring.

Regards Luca


the enhancement 

> On 11 Mar 2015, at 06:32, Morgan Yang <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi:
> 
> Recently the Intel DPDK guys presented about a "us-vhost" approach, which 
> they added DPDK support to KVM's side of vhost. See presentation here 
> http://openvswitch.org/support/ovscon2014/18/1530-dpdk-accelerating.pptx 
> <http://openvswitch.org/support/ovscon2014/18/1530-dpdk-accelerating.pptx>
> 
> The nice thing about this is approach is least intrusive to the guest. For 
> "black box" or bundled virtual appliance deployments, we don't have the 
> ability to change the guest's virtio module, so we don't be able to integrate 
> with PF_RING_ZC and Netmap VALE. 
> 
> I'm curious if PF_RING is planning on something similar. 
> 
> 
> Much Thanks
> Morgan Yang
> _______________________________________________
> Ntop-misc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc

_______________________________________________
Ntop-misc mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc

Reply via email to