[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55FC1B40.9000401@citrix.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:10:08 +0100
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@...rix.com>
To: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@...rix.com>,
<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
CC: <wei.liu2@...rix.com>, <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
<stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>, <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
<boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/20] xen/arm64: Add support for 64KB page in Linux
Hi Roger,
On 14/09/15 13:08, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> Well, absolute numbers together with the standard deviation are IMHO the
> best way to provide those figures (ie: see ministat(1) output for
> example), but percentages should also be fine.
>
> I'm just interested in knowing the performance difference between having
> this patches applied or not when using 4KB pages on the frontend and the
> backend.
I did some benchmark:
DOM0: 1 VCPU, 4G of RAM based on 4.3-rc1 without this series
GUEST: 4 VPUs, 4G of RAM, second disk associate to a nullbk device
I used fio with the following options
42sh> fio --name=test --ioengine=libaio --rw=read --numjobs=8 \
--iodepth=32 --time_based=1 --runtime=30 --bs=4KB \
--filename=/dev/xvdb--direct=1 --group_reporting=1 --iodepth_batch=16
The guest is also based on 4.3-rc1 with and without the series.
The overhead with my series is about 0.56%.
Regards,
--
Julien Grall
--
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