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


RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][HVM] remove qemu shadow_vram patch forperformanc

To: "Keir Fraser" <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Zhai, Edwin" <edwin.zhai@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][HVM] remove qemu shadow_vram patch forperformance
From: "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:48:02 +0800
Cc: Ian Pratt <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 02:47:06 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C2255DB8.BD88%keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcdneKEeI3egLLdJTXqqyHr5t2y97QDUlu7wAABcqvYAAWXdUAAAnbinAAAIQ/A=
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][HVM] remove qemu shadow_vram patch forperformance

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
>Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 5:45 PM
>To: Li, Xin B; Zhai, Edwin; Keir Fraser
>Cc: Ian Pratt; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][HVM] remove qemu shadow_vram 
>patch forperformance
>On 20/3/07 09:36, "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The major problem this patch is trying to fix is the performance drop
>> when multiple HVM guests are running, and I think we need a better
>> solution for this.
>From my own reading of the code I would have thought that by removing
>SSE memcmp we'd be replacing periodic SSE block memcmp with periodic
>pixel-by-pixel comparison (which is what I think we end up doing if we
>past the SSE memcmp?). I'm thinking particularly of the VNC 
>side of things rather than SDL here, 
> by the way: you guys use SDL most of the time, right?

Yes :-)

Xen-devel mailing list