[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.2 Release Plan / TODO
>>> On 19.03.12 at 12:33, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 11:25 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> On 19.03.12 at 11:57, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > * file:// backend performance. qemu-xen-tradition's qdisk is quite >> > slow & blktap2 not available in upstream kernels. Need to >> > consider our options: >> > * qemu-xen's qdisk is thought to be well performing but >> > qemu-xen is not yet the default. Complexity arising from >> > splitting qemu-for-qdisk out from qemu-for-dm and >> > running N qemu's. >> > * potentially fully userspace blktap could be ready for >> > 4.2 >> > * use /dev/loop+blkback. This requires loop driver AIO and >> > O_DIRECT patches which are not (AFAIK) yet upstream. >> >> I meant to ask already when this was first mentioned: What's the >> reason for this requirement? Didn't we have blkback over loop running >> fine for years? Or is this just a performance consideration (in which >> case "requires" might be too strong a term)? > > My understanding (which could well be totally bogus) was that the use > of /dev/loop in this way was unsafe since pages were only committed to > the dom0 page cache and not to the actual platter when success was > reported to the guest. I think that is why many people used tap:aio: > instead of file: (personally I use phy: almost exclusively so I could be > talking rubbish). > > Unless there are some loop patches in the classic-Xen patchset? I don't > think there are though. I know of none either. Jan > I don't know so much about the performance aspect. Stefano might be able > to comment. > > Ian. > >> >> Jan >> >> > * Leverage XCP's blktap2 DKMS work. >> > * Other ideas? >> >> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |