Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model forvbus_driver objects

[Ingo Molnar]

* Anthony Liguori <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> I think the reason vbus gets better performance for networking today 
>>> is that vbus' backends are in the kernel while virtio's backends are 
>>> currently in userspace.  Since Michael has a functioning in-kernel 
>>> backend for virtio-net now, I suspect we're weeks (maybe days) away 
>>> from performance results.  My expectation is that vhost + virtio-net 
>>> will be as good as venet + vbus.  If that's the case, then I don't 
>>> see any reason to adopt vbus unless Greg things there are other 
>>> compelling features over virtio.
>>>     
>>
>> Keeping virtio's backend in user-space was rather stupid IMHO.
>
> I don't think it's quite so clear.

in such a narrow quote it's not so clear indeed - that's why i 
qualified it with:

>> Having the _option_ to piggyback to user-space (for flexibility, 
>> extensibility, etc.) is OK, but not having kernel acceleration is 
>> bad.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/