[libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt

2011-09-27 Thread Reeted
I repost this, this time by also including the libvirt mailing list. Info on my libvirt: it's the version in Ubuntu 11.04 Natty which is 0.8.8-1ubuntu6.5 . I didn't recompile this one, while Kernel and qemu-kvm are vanilla and compiled by hand as described below. My original message follows:

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt

2011-09-28 Thread Reeted
On 09/28/11 09:51, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 08:10:21PM +0200, Reeted wrote: I repost this, this time by also including the libvirt mailing list. Info on my libvirt: it's the version in Ubuntu 11.04 Natty which is 0.8.8-1ubuntu6.5 . I didn't recompile this

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt

2011-09-28 Thread Reeted
On 09/28/11 11:28, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:19:43AM +0200, Reeted wrote: On 09/28/11 09:51, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: This is my bash commandline: /opt/qemu-kvm-0.14.1/bin/qemu-system-x86_64 -M pc-0.14 -enable-kvm -m 2002 -smp 2,sockets=2,cores=1,threads=1 -name

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Reeted
On 09/28/11 11:53, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:49:01AM +0200, Reeted wrote: YES! It's the vhost. With vhost=on it takes about 12 seconds more time to boot. ...meaning? :-) I've no idea. I was always under the impression that 'vhost=on' was the &#x

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Reeted
On 09/28/11 14:56, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:19:09PM +0200, Reeted wrote: Ok that seems to work: it removes the vhost part in the virsh launch hence cutting down 12secs of boot time. If nobody comes out with an explanation of why, I will open another thread on the

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt (due to vhost=on)

2011-09-28 Thread Reeted
On 09/28/11 16:51, Reeted wrote: On 09/28/11 14:56, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:19:09PM +0200, Reeted wrote: Ok that seems to work: it removes the vhost part in the virsh launch hence cutting down 12secs of boot time. If nobody comes out with an explanation of why, I

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM is 3x slower under libvirt

2011-09-29 Thread Reeted
On 09/29/11 02:39, Chris Wright wrote: Can you help narrow down what is happening during the additional 12 seconds in the guest? For example, does a quick simple boot to single user mode happen at the same boot speed w/ and w/out vhost_net? Not tried (would probably be too short to measure eff

[libvirt] Qemu/KVM guest boots 2x slower with vhost_net

2011-10-04 Thread Reeted
Hello all, for people in qemu-devel list, you might want to have a look at the previous thread about this topic, at http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg61537.html but I will try to recap here. I found that virtual machines in my host booted 2x slower (on average it's 2x slower, but probably so

Re: [libvirt] Qemu/KVM guest boots 2x slower with vhost_net

2011-10-09 Thread Reeted
On 10/05/11 01:12, Reeted wrote: . I found that virtual machines in my host booted 2x slower ... to the vhost_net presence ... Just a small update, Firstly: I cannot reproduce any slowness after boot by doing: # time /etc/init.d/chrony restart Restarting time daemon: Starting /usr/sbin

[libvirt] Virtual serial logging server?

2011-11-06 Thread Reeted
Dear all, please excuse the almost-OT question, I see various possibilities in quemu-kvm and libvirt for sending virtual serial port data to files, sockets, pipes, etc on the host. In particular, the TCP socket seems interesting. Can you suggest a server application to receive all such TCP con

[libvirt] Group for accessing one/all VM graphics and not virsh

2011-12-05 Thread Reeted
Hello libvirt people, is there a (preferably simple) way in Linux to allow a certain set of users to be able to do: virt-viewer --connect qemu+ssh://username@virthost/system vmname for connecting to virt-viewer BUT without letting them do all the other things that can be done with virsh? I