[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANRm+CxCEV6FK+Y45t6Pu+qaVjiB+zwqBDWE-rSj=v7Rr+j44A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:17:50 +0800
From: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To: Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
LAK <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ashish Kalra <Ashish.Kalra@...ium.com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Linu Cherian <Linu.Cherian@...ium.com>,
Shih-Wei Li <shihwei@...columbia.edu>,
Sunil Goutham <Sunil.Goutham@...ium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] IPI performance benchmark
2017-12-22 3:02 GMT+08:00 Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 02:44:25PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> Hi Yury,
>> 2017-12-19 16:50 GMT+08:00 Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>:
>> > This benchmark sends many IPIs in different modes and measures
>> > time for IPI delivery (first column), and total time, ie including
>> > time to acknowledge the receive by sender (second column).
>> >
>> > The scenarios are:
>> > Dry-run: do everything except actually sending IPI. Useful
>> > to estimate system overhead.
>> > Self-IPI: Send IPI to self CPU.
>> > Normal IPI: Send IPI to some other CPU.
>> > Broadcast IPI: Send broadcast IPI to all online CPUs.
>> > Broadcast lock: Send broadcast IPI to all online CPUs and force them
>> > acquire/release spinlock.
>> >
>> > The raw output looks like this:
>> > [ 155.363374] Dry-run: 0, 2999696 ns
>> > [ 155.429162] Self-IPI: 30385328, 65589392 ns
>> > [ 156.060821] Normal IPI: 566914128, 631453008 ns
>> > [ 158.384427] Broadcast IPI: 0, 2323368720 ns
>> > [ 160.831850] Broadcast lock: 0, 2447000544 ns
>> >
>> > For virtualized guests, sending and reveiving IPIs causes guest exit.
>> > I used this test to measure performance impact on KVM subsystem of
>> > Christoffer Dall's series "Optimize KVM/ARM for VHE systems" [1].
>> >
>> > Test machine is ThunderX2, 112 online CPUs. Below the results normalized
>> > to host dry-run time, broadcast lock results omitted. Smaller - better.
>>
>> Could you test on a x86 box? I see a lot of calltraces on my haswell
>> client host, there is no calltrace in the guest, however, I can still
>> observe "Invalid parameters" warning when insmod this module. In
>> addition, the x86 box fails to boot when ipi_benchmark is buildin.
>
> I tried to boot kernel with builtin test both on real hardware and
> qemu+kvm - no calltraces or other problems. Kernel is 4.14, config for
> host is attached.
>
> CPU is Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7600U CPU @ 2.80GHz
>
> Kernel is 4.14, config for host is attached, but it's default Ubuntu
> config. Results and qemu command are below. Could you share more details
> about your configuration?
Attch my config file.
Regards,
Wanpeng Li
>
> Yury
>
> qemu-system-x86_64 -hda debian_squeeze_amd64_standard.qcow2 \
> -smp 1 -curses --nographic --enable-kvm
>
> Host, 4 cores:
> [ 0.237279] Dry-run: 0, 170292 ns
> [ 0.643269] Self-IPI: 458516336, 922256372 ns
> [ 0.902545] Self-IPI: 508518362, 972130665 ns
> [ 0.646500] Broadcast IPI: 0, 97301545 ns
> [ 0.649712] Broadcast lock: 0, 102364755 ns
>
> KVM, single core:
> [ 0.237279] Dry-run: 0, 124500 ns
> [ 0.643269] Self-IPI: 202518310, 405444790 ns
> [ 0.643694] Normal IPI FAILED: -2
> [ 0.646500] Broadcast IPI: 0, 2524370 ns
> [ 0.649712] Broadcast lock: 0, 2642270 ns
>
> KVM, 4 cores:
> [ 0.492676] Dry-run: 0, 126380 ns
> [ 0.902545] Self-IPI: 204085450, 409863800 ns
> [ 2.179676] Normal IPI: 1058014940, 1276742820 ns
> [ 3.396132] Broadcast IPI: 0, 1215934730 ns
> [ 4.610719] Broadcast lock: 0, 1213945500 ns
Download attachment "config" of type "application/octet-stream" (210069 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists