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: [PATCH 13/14] x86/ticketlock: add slowpath logic

To: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 13/14] x86/ticketlock: add slowpath logic
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:52:21 +0000
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Eric Dumazet <dada1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, suzuki@xxxxxxxxxx, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx, Linux Virtualization <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 01:52:46 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4D37338E.8030509@xxxxxxxx>
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>
References: <cover.1289940821.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <97ed99ae9160bdb6477284b333bd6708fb7a19cb.1289940821.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <20110117152222.GA19233@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D372DEA.1060004@xxxxxxxx> <20110119183914.GB7235@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D37338E.8030509@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> On 19.01.11 at 19:55, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 01/19/2011 10:39 AM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
>> I have tested quite extensively with booting a 16-vcpu guest (on a 16-pcpu 
> host)
>> and running kernel compine (with 32-threads). Without this patch, I had
>> difficulty booting/shutting-down successfully (it would hang mid-way).
> Sounds good.  But I like to test with "make -j 100-200" to really give
> things a workout.

Hmm, in my experience, heavily over-committing CPUs (e.g. a
domain with double or more the vCPU-s that the system has
pCPU-s, or the pCPU-s the domain is allowed to run on) is a
much better test for eventual problems in the spin lock code


Xen-devel mailing list