WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Improving hvm IO performance by using self IO emulator (

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Improving hvm IO performance by using self IO emulator (YA io-emu?)
From: tgingold@xxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:33:43 +0100
Cc: Tristan Gingold <tgingold@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 01:33:00 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C202FDE7.2710%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <C202FDE7.2710%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.5
Quoting Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> On 22/2/07 05:23, "Tristan Gingold" <tgingold@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > The current IO emulator (ioemu process in dom-0) is a well known bottleneck
> > for hvm performance because IO requests travel is long and cross many
> rings.
> >
> > Many ideas to improve the emulation have been proposed.  None of them have
> > been adopted because their approach are too disruptive.
> >
> > Based on my recent firmware experience I'd like to propose a new method.
>
> This sounds plausible. It probably depends on what kind of 'firmware'
> environment you plan to drop the ioemu code into? The general idea of
> emulated devices looking to the control stack like PV I/O is one that we
> want for x86 as well.
Yes that's the idea.

> So any xend changes to that effect are welcome.

> > * From the hypervisor point of view such an hvm domain looks like a PV
> domain:
> > only the creation differs.  This IO emulation method unifies the domain.
> This
> > will simplify save & restore and Xen in general.
>
> I don't know the specifics of ia64 VTi, but I'd expect that Xen will still
> need to be aware of VTi?
Sure.
> I'd be surprised if the differences can be hidden
> safely and efficiently.
If we can get rid of the ioemu process the differences between hvm and PV will
be small, won't they ?

> The model you propose sounds much more to me like a
> VTi (non-PV) domain with PV extensions in an extended firmware module.
Yes, but this model should work with the ioemu process.

Tristan.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel