[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130802092329.GA28327@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 11:23:29 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, mingo@...hat.com, x86@...nel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, jeremy@...p.org, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
hpa@...or.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
peterz@...radead.org, mtosatti@...hat.com,
stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com, andi@...stfloor.org,
attilio.rao@...rix.com, ouyang@...pitt.edu, gregkh@...e.de,
agraf@...e.de, chegu_vinod@...com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
avi.kivity@...il.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, riel@...hat.com, drjones@...hat.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V11 15/18] kvm : Paravirtual ticketlocks support for
linux guests running on KVM hypervisor
* Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 02:34 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> >On 08/01/2013 01:15 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>>Shall I consider this as an ack for kvm part?
> >>>
> >>For everything except 18/18. For that I still want to see numbers. But
> >>18/18 is pretty independent from the reset of the series so it should
> >>not stop the reset from going in.
> >
> >Yes. agreed.
> >I am going to evaluate patch 18 separately and come with results for
> >that. Now we can consider only 1-17 patches.
> >
>
> Gleb,
>
> 32 core machine with HT off 32 vcpu guests.
> base = 3.11-rc + patch 1 -17 pvspinlock_v11
> patched = base + patch 18
>
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
> dbench (Throughput in MB/sec higher is better)
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
> base stdev patched stdev %improvement
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
> 1x 14584.3800 146.9074 14705.1000 163.1060 0.82773
> 2x 1713.7300 32.8750 1717.3200 45.5979 0.20948
> 3x 967.8212 42.0257 971.8855 18.8532 0.41994
> 4x 685.2764 25.7150 694.5881 8.3907 1.35882
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
Please list stddev in percentage as well ...
a blind stab gave me these figures:
> base stdev patched stdev %improvement
> 3x 967.8212 4.3% 971.8855 1.8% 0.4
That makes the improvement an order of magnitude smaller than the noise of
the measurement ... i.e. totally inconclusive.
Also please cut the excessive decimal points: with 2-4% noise what point
is there in 5 decimal point results??
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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