Uploaded image for project: 'RHEL'
  1. RHEL
  2. RHEL-148725

Viostor/vioscsi is ~8x Slower than Rhel's Vioblk/vioscsi

Linking RHIVOS CVEs to...Migration: Automation ...Sync from "Extern...XMLWordPrintable

    • Icon: Bug Bug
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Icon: Normal Normal
    • rhel-10.3
    • rhel-10.2
    • virtio-win
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • rhel-virt-windows
    • None
    • False
    • False
    • Hide

      None

      Show
      None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • Unspecified
    • Unspecified
    • Unspecified
    • None

      What were you trying to do that didn't work?

      Viostor/vioscsi is ~8x Slower than Rhel's Vioblk/vioscsi

      Please provide the package NVR for which the bug is seen:

      qemu-kvm-10.1.0-12.el10

      kernel-6.12.0-195.el10.x86_64

      How reproducible is this bug?:

      100%

      Actual results

      The rhel's

      The windows's

      The detailed steps are in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fvxQDYcS4eGrfKtprq1SdAs3pVRU9kVFR2W73ZapAD8/edit?usp=sharing

       

      Note that:

      1. Windows' own vioblk performs worse than vioscsi, which is unexpected
      2. Windows' vioblk/vioscsi is ~8x slower than rhel's, but window's SATA is only ~1.7x slower than rhel's SATA

              rhn-support-vrozenfe Vadim Rozenfeld
              timao@redhat.com Tingting Mao
              Virt Windows SST Bugs Virt Windows SST Bugs
              Peixiu Hou Peixiu Hou
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              11 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated: