This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] RE: Rather slow time of Pin in Windows with GPL PV driver

Send the RHEL source code for convience.
I will have some performance test later.
In my understanding, KeSetTargetProcessorDpc(&xi->rx_dpc, num)
means put this Dpc into numth CPU dpc queue, right ?
What is the difference between this line of code is commentted
and  the num is set to 0? I assume they have the same mean, right?
> Subject: RE: Rather slow time of Pin in Windows with GPL PV driver
> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:28:48 +1100
> From: james.harper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: tinnycloud@xxxxxxxxxxx
> CC: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > I may try pin later, my host has 4 * 4 core CPU.
> >
> > Well, I just compare GPL and RHEL PV driver codes, I noticed most of
> the net
> > driver
> > initialization is the same. Only one difference, in GPL code has the
> code of
> > KeSetTargetProcessorDpc(&xi->rx_dpc, 0); //in xennet_rx.c line 953
> > but the RHEL doesn't
> >
> > So I simply comments the code, recompile and did the test again.
> > The result shows good, all ping time less than < 1ms.
> >
> > May it be the cause? Is it harmful to comments this line?
> > Many thanks.
> >
> At a guess I would say it should be harmful to performance, but all the
> critical code is protected by spinlocks.
> It could be a leftover from a previous version of GPLPV. In the current
> version, the spinlock protected code is probably a little long winded
> but is nothing compared to the passing down of packets to Windows that
> is done in the DPC but outside the spinlock.
> Can you do some general performance tests with this change?
> Is the RHEL PV driver source publicly available?
> James

Attachment: src.rar
Description: Binary data

Xen-devel mailing list