From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Lan, Tianyu" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 00/10] Qemu: Add live migration support for SRIOV NIC Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 14:42:36 +0800 Message-ID: <566135DC.7070109@intel.com> References: <1448372127-28115-1-git-send-email-tianyu.lan@intel.com> <20151130095454-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <565D3DB1.5050902@intel.com> <20151201164327-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <565EFB59.1000005@intel.com> <20151202161042-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: aik@ozlabs.ru, alex.williamson@redhat.com, amit.shah@redhat.com, anthony@codemonkey.ws, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, blauwirbel@gmail.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, eddie.dong@intel.com, nrupal.jani@intel.com, agraf@suse.de, kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, emil.s.tantilov@intel.com, gerlitz.or@gmail.com, donald.c.skidmore@intel.com, mark.d.rustad@intel.com, kraxel@redhat.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com, quintela@redhat.com To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:14163 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751178AbbLDGmy (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 01:42:54 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20151202161042-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/2/2015 10:31 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >We hope >> >to find a better way to make SRIOV NIC work in these cases and this is >> >worth to do since SRIOV NIC provides better network performance compared >> >with PV NIC. > If this is a performance optimization as the above implies, > you need to include some numbers, and document how did > you implement the switch and how did you measure the performance. > OK. Some ideas of my patches come from paper "CompSC: Live Migration with Pass-through Devices". http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/vee_2012/papers/p109.pdf It compared performance data between the solution of switching PV and VF and VF migration.(Chapter 7: Discussion) >> >Current patches have some issues. I think we can find >> >solution for them andimprove them step by step. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58272) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4k4s-0004lM-OM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 01:42:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4k4p-0004hM-I2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 01:42:46 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:1144) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4k4p-0004hI-Cb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 01:42:43 -0500 From: "Lan, Tianyu" References: <1448372127-28115-1-git-send-email-tianyu.lan@intel.com> <20151130095454-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <565D3DB1.5050902@intel.com> <20151201164327-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <565EFB59.1000005@intel.com> <20151202161042-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> Message-ID: <566135DC.7070109@intel.com> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 14:42:36 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151202161042-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH V2 00/10] Qemu: Add live migration support for SRIOV NIC List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, emil.s.tantilov@intel.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, aik@ozlabs.ru, donald.c.skidmore@intel.com, quintela@redhat.com, eddie.dong@intel.com, nrupal.jani@intel.com, agraf@suse.de, blauwirbel@gmail.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, kraxel@redhat.com, anthony@codemonkey.ws, amit.shah@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, mark.d.rustad@intel.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com, gerlitz.or@gmail.com On 12/2/2015 10:31 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >We hope >> >to find a better way to make SRIOV NIC work in these cases and this is >> >worth to do since SRIOV NIC provides better network performance compared >> >with PV NIC. > If this is a performance optimization as the above implies, > you need to include some numbers, and document how did > you implement the switch and how did you measure the performance. > OK. Some ideas of my patches come from paper "CompSC: Live Migration with Pass-through Devices". http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/vee_2012/papers/p109.pdf It compared performance data between the solution of switching PV and VF and VF migration.(Chapter 7: Discussion) >> >Current patches have some issues. I think we can find >> >solution for them andimprove them step by step.