From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FB4C54FD0 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 05:28:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20E01206E2 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 05:28:46 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 20E01206E2 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jSwJR-0007aV-31; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 05:28:13 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jSwJQ-0007aQ-KI for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 05:28:12 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: e203fda6-8847-11ea-ae69-bc764e2007e4 Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id e203fda6-8847-11ea-ae69-bc764e2007e4; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 05:28:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3573AE28; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 05:28:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Xen network domain performance for 10Gb NIC To: tosher 1 , Xen-devel References: <1359850718.562651.1587928713792.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1359850718.562651.1587928713792@mail.yahoo.com> From: =?UTF-8?B?SsO8cmdlbiBHcm/Dnw==?= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 07:28:07 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1359850718.562651.1587928713792@mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On 26.04.20 21:18, tosher 1 wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Lately, I have been experimenting with 10Gb NIC performance on Xen domains. I have found that network performance is very poor for PV networking when a driver domain is used as a network backend. > > My experimental setup is I have two machines connected by the 10Gb network: a server running the Xen hypervisor and a desktop machine working as a client. I have Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS running on the Dom0, Domus, Driver Domain, and client desktop, where the Xen version is 4.9. I measured the network bandwidth using iPerf3. > > The network bandwidth between a DomU using Dom0 as backend and the client desktop is like 9.39Gbits/sec. However, when I use a network driver domain, which has the 10Gb NIC by PCI pass through, the bandwidth between the DomU and the client desktop is like 2.41Gbit/sec is one direction and 4.48Gbits/sec in another direction. Here, by direction, I mean the client-server direction for iPerf3. > > These results indicate a huge performance degradation, which is unexpected. I am wondering if I am missing any key points here which I should have taken care of or if there is any tweak that I can apply. Is the driver domain PV or HVM? How many vcpus do dom0, the driver domain and the guest have? Juergen