On 2013/5/20 15:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 02:11:19AM +, Qinchuanyu wrote:
Vhost thread provide both tx and rx ability for virtio-net.
In the forwarding scenarios, tx and rx share the vhost thread, and throughput
is limited by single thread.
So I did a patch for
On 05/22/2013 05:59 PM, Zang Hongyong wrote:
On 2013/5/20 15:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 02:11:19AM +, Qinchuanyu wrote:
Vhost thread provide both tx and rx ability for virtio-net.
In the forwarding scenarios, tx and rx share the vhost thread, and
throughput is
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 05:59:03PM +0800, Zang Hongyong wrote:
On 2013/5/20 15:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 02:11:19AM +, Qinchuanyu wrote:
Vhost thread provide both tx and rx ability for virtio-net.
In the forwarding scenarios, tx and rx share the vhost thread,
Jason Wang jasow...@redhat.com writes:
On 05/22/2013 05:59 PM, Zang Hongyong wrote:
On 2013/5/20 15:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 02:11:19AM +, Qinchuanyu wrote:
Yes, I don't think we want to create threads even more aggressively
in all cases. I'm worried about
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 02:11:19AM +, Qinchuanyu wrote:
Vhost thread provide both tx and rx ability for virtio-net.
In the forwarding scenarios, tx and rx share the vhost thread, and throughput
is limited by single thread.
So I did a patch for provide vhost thread per virtqueue, not
Vhost thread provide both tx and rx ability for virtio-net.
In the forwarding scenarios, tx and rx share the vhost thread, and throughput
is limited by single thread.
So I did a patch for provide vhost thread per virtqueue, not per vhost_net.
Of course, multi-queue virtio-net is final
