[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F0488AB.6000003@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 19:13:15 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Gang scheduling in CFS
On 01/04/2012 04:56 PM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> * Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com> [2012-01-04 16:41:58]:
>
> > > Here are some observation related to Baseline-only(8vm case)
> > >
> > > | ple_gap=128 | ple_gap=64 | ple_gap=256 | ple_window=2048
> > > --------------+-------------+------------+-------------+----------------
> > > EbzyRecords/s | 2247.50 | 2132.75 | 2086.25 | 1835.62
> > > PauseExits | 7928154.00 | 6696342.00 | 7365999.00 | 50319582.00
> > >
> > > With ple_window = 2048, PauseExits is more than 6times the default case
> >
> > So it looks like the default is optimal, at least wrt the cases you
> > tested and your test workload.
>
> The default case still lags considerably behind the results we are seeing with
> gang scheduling. One more interesting data point would be to see how
> many PLE exits we are seeing when the vcpu is spinning in
> flush_tlb_others_ipi(). Is there any easy way to determine that?
>
You could get an exit trace (trace-cmd -e kvm:kvm_exit) and filter on
PLE exits; the trace contains the guest %rip, so you could match it
against flush_tlb_others_ipi().
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists