[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200109161742.GC15671@xz-x1>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 11:17:42 -0500
From: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@...hat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Kevin Kevin <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/21] KVM: Dirty ring interface
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 10:59:50AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 09:57:08AM -0500, Peter Xu wrote:
> > Branch is here: https://github.com/xzpeter/linux/tree/kvm-dirty-ring
> > (based on kvm/queue)
> >
> > Please refer to either the previous cover letters, or documentation
> > update in patch 12 for the big picture.
>
> I would rather you pasted it here. There's no way to respond otherwise.
Sure, will do in the next post.
>
> For something that's presumably an optimization, isn't there
> some kind of testing that can be done to show the benefits?
> What kind of gain was observed?
Since the interface seems to settle soon, maybe it's time to work on
the QEMU part so I can give some number. It would be interesting to
know the curves between dirty logging and dirty ring even for some
small vms that have some workloads inside.
>
> I know it's mostly relevant for huge VMs, but OTOH these
> probably use huge pages.
Yes huge VMs could benefit more, especially if the dirty rate is not
that high, I believe. Though, could you elaborate on why huge pages
are special here?
Thanks,
--
Peter Xu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists