Re: [PATCH 0/7] AlacrityVM guest drivers Reply-To:

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



How hard would it be to implement virtio over vbus and perhaps the
virtio-net backend?

This would leave only one variable in the comparison, clear misconceptions and
make evaluation easier by judging each of vbus, venet etc separately on its own
merits.

The way things are now, it is unclear exactly where those performance
improvements are coming from (or how much each component contributes)
because there are too many variables.

Replacing virtio-net by venet would be a hard proposition if only because
virtio-net has (closed source) windows drivers available. There has to be
shown that venet by itself does something significantly better that
virtio-net can't be modified to do comparably well.

Having venet in addition to virtio-net is also difficult, given that having only
one set of paravirtual drivers in the kernel was the whole point behind virtio.

Just a user's 0.02,
Pantelis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux