Bobby Eshleman wrote: > We're testing usage of vsock as a way to redirect guest-local UDS > requests to the host and this patch series greatly improves the > performance of such a setup. > > Compared to copying packets via userspace, this improves throughput by > 121% in basic testing. > > Tested as follows. > > Setup: guest unix dgram sender -> guest vsock redirector -> host vsock > server > Threads: 1 > Payload: 64k > No sockmap: > - 76.3 MB/s > - The guest vsock redirector was > "socat VSOCK-CONNECT:2:1234 UNIX-RECV:/path/to/sock" > Using sockmap (this patch): > - 168.8 MB/s (+121%) > - The guest redirector was a simple sockmap echo server, > redirecting unix ingress to vsock 2:1234 egress. > - Same sender and server programs > > *Note: these numbers are from RFC v1 > > Only the virtio transport has been tested. The loopback transport was > used in writing bpf/selftests, but not thoroughly tested otherwise. > > This series requires the skb patch. Appears reasonable to me although I didn't review internals of all the af_vsock stuff. I see it got merged great. One nit, I have a series coming shortly to pull the tests out of the sockmap_listen and into a sockmap_vsock because I don't think they belong in _listen but that is just a refactor. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
