| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH][RFC]Provide fast write emulation path to release
At 10:20 +0800 on 22 Jan (1200997253), Tian, Kevin wrote:
> We also did series of tests on 32/32pae/32e: (host is 32e)
> 32 32pae 32e
> ----Linux----
> kernel build +1% +0.86% +1.9%
> Specjbb +0.9% +1.61% +0.32%
>
> ----XP----
> Sysbench N/A -0.05% -0.32%(*)
>
> * Sysbench score is not very stable on 32e guest, with up
> to 6% variation observed in 5 rounds running. 32pae is
> stable. 32 XP image was unfortunately corrupted at test
> cycle, so not test yet. Don't want to hold here from getting
> early comments. :-)
>
> I thought the performance gain should be straightforward
> with this patch, and thus would like to know comment
> like:
> - Is it a right direction?
Looks good to me!
> - Is there anything wrong or missed in patch?
Nothing fundamental that I can see by reading through it. One thing I'd
change is to avoid introducing "vfn": a virtual address >> PAGE_SIZE is
just a "page number".
> - Any more benchmarks should we test?
Anything and everything. :) Specially multi-vcpu mixed operations
(e.g. kernel compile + ltp + network traffic) while doing live migrate.
Even when they look as clean as this one, changes in the shadow fault
handler tend to chase out implicit/forgotten assumptions.
Cheers,
Tim.
--
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, Citrix Systems (R&D) Ltd.
[Company #02300071, SL9 0DZ, UK.]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home