| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
 Re: [Xen-users] Release 0.8.0 of GPL PV Drivers for Windows
 
To: "jim burns" <jim_burn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>From: "Emre ERENOGLU" <erenoglu@xxxxxxxxx>Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:50:13 +0100Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxDelivery-date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:50:50 -0800Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;	h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;	b=LYhVuq78dOz2rWr9omnCOX6VLVB96w3E+7mul+G2fDxEebKtXnvgZ+xoT1q6Eg6rcAfJTgx/r/9GDqlzdTVtRpVxLwogB6lvsQTpeXZOUnWX09aqfQ297zX51SJ3DsHxkZ/t+d6gCYZxdseSP81DeKLAR9oa9j9IurmPatLp3YE=List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com> Hi Jim,
 
 Thanks for the test, great to have this information. I'm really wondering the performance of the "unmodified_drivers" in the xen package, which can be compiled in a "HVM Linux DomU" to get Paravirtual Drivers for disks and ethernet card.
 
 When I tested these on Xen 3.1 on Pardus Linux DomU, I was getting very similar performance on -disks- with hdparm. No other "reliable" tests were performed. I also didn't test the network card.
 
 Emre
 
 
 On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 3:21 PM, jim burns <jim_burn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote: 
On Thursday 28 February 2008 06:07:00 am Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:> I can recommend iperf too.
 >
 > Make sure you use the same iperf version everywhere.
 
 Ok, here's my results.
 
 Equipment: core duo 2300, 1.66ghz each, sata drive configured for UDMA/100
 System: fc8 32bit pae, xen 3.1.2, xen.gz 3.1.0-rc7, dom0 2.6.21
 Tested hvm: XP Pro SP2, 2002
 
 Method:
 
 The version tested was 1.7.0, to avoid having to apply the kernel patch that
 comes with 2.0.2. The binaries downloaded were from the project homepage
 http://dast.nlanr.net/Projects/Iperf/#download. For linux, I chose the 'Linux
 libc 2.3 binary and (on fc8 at least) I still had to install the
 compat-libstdc++-33 package to get it to run.
 
 The server/listening side was always the dom0, invoked with 'iperf -s'. The
 first machine is a linux fc8 pv domu, the second is another machine on my
 subnet with a 100Mbps nic pipeline inbetween, and the rest are the various
 drivers on a winxp hvm. The invoked command was 'iperf -c dom0-hostname -t
 60'. '-t 60' sets the runtime to 60 secs. I used the default buffer size
 (8k), mss/mtu, and window size (which actually varies between the client and
 the server). I averaged 3 tcp runs.
 
 For the udp tests, the default bandwidth is 1 Mbps (add the '-b 1000000' flag
 to the command above). I added or subtracted a 0 till I got a packet loss
 percentage of more than 0% and less than 5%, or an observed throughput
 significantly less than the request (in other words, a stress test). In the
 table below, 'udp Mpbs' is the observed, and '-b Mpbs' is the requested rate.
 (The server has to be invoked with 'iperf -s -u'.)
 
 machine  | tcp Mbps| udp Mbps| -b Mbps | udp packet loss
 fc8 domu |   1563  |     48.6|     100 |    .08%
 on subnet|     79.8|      5.4|      10 |   3.5%
 gplpv    |     19.8|      2.0|      10 |   0.0%
 realtek  |      9.6|      1.8|      10 |   0.0%
 
 Conclusions: The pv domu tcp rate is a blistering 1.5 Gbps, showing that a
 software nic *can* be even faster than a 100 Mpbs hardware nic, at least for
 pv. The machine on the same subnet ('on subnet') achieved 80% of the max rate
 supported by the hardware. Presumably, since the udp rates are consistently
 less than the tcp ones, there was a lot of tcp retransmits. gplpv is twice as
 fast as realtek for tcp, about the same for udp. 19.8/8 = ~2.5 MBps, which is
 about the rate I was getting with my domu to dom0 file copies. I don't expect
 pv data rates from an hvm, but it should be interesting to see how much
 faster James & Andy can get this to go. Btw, this was gplpv 0.8.4.
 
 Actually, pretty good work so far guys!
 
 _______________________________________________
 Xen-users mailing list
 Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
 
 
 --
 Emre Erenoglu
 erenoglu@xxxxxxxxx
 _______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users 
 |