On 2017/8/29 22:02, Wanpeng Li wrote:
Here is the data we get when running benchmark netperf: 2. w/ patch: halt_poll_threshold=10000 -- 15803.89 bits/s -- 159.5 %CPU halt_poll_threshold=20000 -- 15899.04 bits/s -- 161.5 %CPU halt_poll_threshold=30000 -- 15642.38 bits/s -- 161.8 %CPU halt_poll_threshold=40000 -- 18040.76 bits/s -- 184.0 %CPU halt_poll_threshold=50000 -- 18877.61 bits/s -- 197.3 %CPU 3. kvm dynamic poll halt_poll_ns=10000 -- 15876.00 bits/s -- 172.2 %CPU halt_poll_ns=20000 -- 15602.58 bits/s -- 185.4 %CPU halt_poll_ns=30000 -- 15930.69 bits/s -- 194.4 %CPU halt_poll_ns=40000 -- 16413.09 bits/s -- 195.3 %CPU halt_poll_ns=50000 -- 16417.42 bits/s -- 196.3 %CPUActually I'm not sure how much sense it makes to introduce this pv stuff and the duplicate adaptive halt-polling logic as what has already been done in kvm w/o obvious benefit for real workload like > netperf. In addition, as you mentioned offline to me, enable both the patchset and the adaptive halt-polling logic in kvm simultaneously can result in more cpu power consumption. I remembered that David from
If we use poll in KVM side, it will consume more cpu than in guest side. If use both two, then we can get the same performance as only enable guest side poll but it will cost more cpu because of poll KVM side. It means we should disable KVM side poll since it cannot give much improvement than guest side except consume more cpu and large latency.
Google mentioned that Windows Event Objects can get 2x latency improvement in KVM FORUM, which means that the adaptive halt-polling in kvm should be enabled by default. So if the windows guests and linux guests are mixed on the same host, then this patchset will result in more cpu power consumption if the customer enable the polling in the linux guest. Anyway, if the patchset is finally acceptable by maintainer, I will introduce the generic adaptive halt-polling framework in kvm to avoid the duplicate logic.
We will add more conditions than the current algorithm in future. But it's ok to use the one copy currently, we will do it in next version.
-- Yang Alibaba Cloud Computing
