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: non-zero order allocations in shadow code may prevent li

To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: non-zero order allocations in shadow code may prevent live migration
From: Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:13:50 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 05:14:32 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <46FBAFEA.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
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: <46FB995B.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx> <20070927105024.GB23760@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <46FBAFEA.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
At 12:28 +0100 on 27 Sep (1190896090), Jan Beulich wrote:
> Nevertheless I would think that
> even for HVM domains the shadow shouldn't need to make its entire
> allocation in order 2 chunks, but could limit this to just the amount it 
> really
> knows it'll need (1 per vCPU as I understand it),

For correctness, yes.  At least 1 per process in the working set for
anything like reasonable performance.

> then continue with order 1
> chunks (not sure about their count, but for forward progress I think you'll
> need at most 6 {,f}l1_32_shadow pages per vCPU).

ISTR the number came out at something unpleasant like thirteen after all
the VAs you might need for a single x86 instruction were accounted for.
But then we realised that even a heavily pessimistic lower bound was so
far below the threshold of acceptable performance that it wasn't worth
being precise. :)


Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XenSource UK Limited
Registered office c/o EC2Y 5EB, UK; company number 05334508

Xen-devel mailing list