Re: [Xen-users] Release 0.8.0 of GPL PV Drivers for Windows

[Andy Grover <andy.grover@xxxxxxxxxx>]

James Harper wrote:
> > > Xensource and VirtualIron claim "near bare metal performance" with PV
> > >       
> I think performance could be a little bit better than that!
>
> Andy: Any suggestions? Do you think your last cleanup commit could have
> reduced performance at all?
>   
It'd be great to get real numbers instead of vague performance claims. I 
think eval versions of at least some other PV drivers are available -- 
Novell? XenSource? -- if someone was willing to do some benchmarking to 
see how things fall out for both send and receive.
I would not be at all surprised if our drivers performed worse, since we 
haven't tuned them much at all yet. But we need data. For TX, we are 
performing a copy to linearize the packet because for each packet 
Windows gives us 3 little + 1 big buffer, and I thought we wouldn't want 
to spend 4 grant refs per packet. I think that's the right thing to do 
but who knows. We also don't implement large sends. Other culprits might 
be lock contention, or maybe we need to add interrupt moderation to 
reduce the number of interrupts per packet.
Regards -- Andy

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users