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] Xen, Windows 2003 and APIC

To: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Xen, Windows 2003 and APIC
From: Gary Pennington <Gary.Pennington@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 16:57:19 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, et-mgmt-tools@xxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:53:55 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <de76405a0812050842u6c1fcdbeldf46ab5e77350df6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: Solaris Kernel Development; Sun Microsystems, Inc.
References: <20081205140341.GD29148@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C55EEF13.9EA%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <de76405a0812050842u6c1fcdbeldf46ab5e77350df6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Gary Pennington <gary.pennington@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 04:42:57PM +0000, George Dunlap wrote:
> IIRC, only w2k3sp2+, vista, and w2k8 have lazy TPR.  Not positive
> about w2k3sp1, but I think it doesn't.  WinXP does not have lazy TPR
> in any service pack, AFAIK.
> 
> What service pack of w2k3 did you do those tests with?
> 

I'm not sure, because the ISO was provided by a colleague. I think it's
the original release of w2k3, with no service packs.

However, what I was mostly curious about was why specifying apic when the
guest was created made so much different to performance.

Gary

> Hopefully, sometime in the next few weeks, I'll be able to release my
> 'xenalyze' tool, which will help a lot with analyzing what's really
> going on with these kinds of workloads.
> 
>  -George
> 
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 05/12/2008 14:03, "Gary Pennington" <Gary.Pennington@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> My next question is: What is really happening when APIC is specified for
> >> a windows guest and why does performance vary so much according to whether
> >> it's specified or not?
> >
> > Older Windows kernels update the APIC TPR a lot, and unless you have a very
> > modern Intel processor every one of those TPR updates causes a vmexit.
> >
> > Modern Windows (including possibly latest w2k3 service pack, but I'm not
> > totally certain) includes lazy TPR, which gets rid of the vast majority of
> > TPR updates, and hence will go much faster.
> >
> >  -- Keir
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

-- 
Gary Pennington
Solaris Core OS
Sun Microsystems
Gary.Pennington@xxxxxxx

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>