>>Have you had any further progress on this regression/problem? Hi Peter, I didn't re-tested myself, but a proxmox user who's have the problem with qemu-kvm 1.2, with windows guest and linux guest, don't have the problem anymore with qemu 1.3.
http://forum.proxmox.com/threads/12157-Win2003R2-in-KVM-VM-is-slow-in-PVE-2-2-when-multiply-CPU-cores-allowed I'll try to redone test myself this week Regards, Alexandre ----- Mail original ----- De: "Peter Lieven" <p...@dlhnet.de> À: "Alexandre DERUMIER" <aderum...@odiso.com> Cc: "Dietmar Maurer" <diet...@proxmox.com>, "Stefan Hajnoczi" <stefa...@gmail.com>, "Jan Kiszka" <jan.kis...@web.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com>, "Peter Lieven" <lieven-li...@dlhnet.de> Envoyé: Lundi 3 Décembre 2012 12:23:11 Objet: Re: [Qemu-devel] slow virtio network with vhost=on and multiple cores Am 16.11.2012 um 12:00 schrieb Alexandre DERUMIER <aderum...@odiso.com>: >>> While trying to reproduce the bug, we just detected that it depends on the >>> hardware (mainboard) you run on. >>> >>> Sigh :-/ > > Hi, > > I can reproduce the bug on all my dell servers,differents generation (R710 > (intel),R815 (amd), 2950 (intel). > > They all use broadcom bnx2 network card (don't know if it can be related) > > host kernel : rhel 63 with 2.6.32 kernel > > guest kernel : 2.6.32 (debian squeeze, ubuntu). > > No problem with guest kernel 3.2 Have you had any further progress on this regression/problem? Thanks, Peter > > > > > ----- Mail original ----- > > De: "Dietmar Maurer" <diet...@proxmox.com> > À: "Peter Lieven" <lieven-li...@dlhnet.de> > Cc: "Stefan Hajnoczi" <stefa...@gmail.com>, "Peter Lieven" <p...@dlhnet.de>, > "Jan Kiszka" <jan.kis...@web.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" > <m...@redhat.com> > Envoyé: Vendredi 16 Novembre 2012 11:44:26 > Objet: Re: [Qemu-devel] slow virtio network with vhost=on and multiple cores > >>> I only tested with RHEL6.3 kernel on host. >> >> can you check if there is a difference on interrupt delivery between those >> two? >> >> cat /proc/interrupts should be sufficient after some traffic has flown. > > While trying to reproduce the bug, we just detected that it depends on the > hardware (mainboard) you run on. > > Sigh :-/
