On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 09:33:03PM +0800, sochin.jiang wrote:
> From: "sochin.jiang"
>
> Till now, we've already notify guest as a batch mostly, an
> extra BH won't decrease guest interrupts much, but cause a
> significant notification loss. Generally, we could have 15%
> or so performance lo
In fact, I firstly found a performance loss before and after
commit 9ffe337 using fio tools in suse11-sp3 guest(vitio-blk), especially
when testing 4k single IO models(say, write, randwrite, read and
randread, with iodepth set to 1), the result is 15%-20% performance loss
since commit 9ffe337,
On 19/12/2017 14:33, sochin.jiang wrote:
> From: "sochin.jiang"
>
> Till now, we've already notify guest as a batch mostly, an
> extra BH won't decrease guest interrupts much, but cause a
> significant notification loss. Generally, we could have 15%
> or so performance lost in single queue IO
From: "sochin.jiang"
Till now, we've already notify guest as a batch mostly, an
extra BH won't decrease guest interrupts much, but cause a
significant notification loss. Generally, we could have 15%
or so performance lost in single queue IO models, as I tested.
Signed-off-by: sochin.jiang
-
