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] Performance difference between Xen versions

To: "Juergen Gross" <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Performance difference between Xen versions
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 17:10:09 +0100
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 09:09:59 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4DBAAFF1.8080001@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>
References: <4DBAAFF1.8080001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> On 29.04.11 at 14:32, Juergen Gross <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> comparing performance of different Xen versions with BS2000 as HVM guest
> showed some weird data I'd like to understand.
> 
> All measurements were done on an Intel Xeon E7220 box. We used a disk-
> benchmark and found the cpu utilization was much higher with Xen 4.0 
> compared
> to Xen 3.3. I did some more investigation and narrowed things down to calls 
> of
> the hypervisor (implicit or explicit).
> 
> Following is a table with timing data for different low-level functions, all
> timing values are tsc ticks obtained via rdtsc:
> 
> Xen 3.3     Xen 4.0      Function
>        88        165      just the measurement overhead
>       176        330      rdtsc-instruction + cli/sti
>      5896      11044      lapic timer query
>      7381      13519      setting lapic timer
>      4653       8987      reload of cr3
>      3124       5709      invlpg instruction
>    792253     792264      wbinvd instruction
>       748       1375      int + iret
>      5203       9317      hypervisor yield call
> 12598102   12597882      memory access loop
> 
> All operations involving the hypervisor take nearly twice the time on 4.0.
> Operations not involving the hypervisor (wbinvd and memory access loop) are
> the same on both systems (this rules out the possibility of different rdtsc
> behavior).
> 
> Is there any easy explanation for this? Both Xen versions are from SLES
> (SLES11 or SLES11 SP1).

I think cpufreq handling was off by default in 3.3, and is on by
default on 4.0. Try turning this off, or using the performance
governor.

> 
> 
> Juergen


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

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