On 11/18/2009 03:28 PM, Yoshiaki Tamura wrote:
I don't think lmbench is intensive but it's sensitive to memory latency.
We'll measure kernel build time with minimum config, and post it later.
Here are some quick numbers of parallel kernel compile time.
The number of vcpu is 1, just for convenience.
time make -j 2 all
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base: real 1m13.950s (user 1m2.742s, sys 0m10.446s)
Kemari: real 1m22.720s (user 1m5.882s, sys 0m10.882s)
time make -j 4 all
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base: real 1m11.234s (user 1m2.582s, sys 0m8.643s)
Kemari: real 1m26.964s (user 1m6.530s, sys 0m12.194s)
The result of Kemari includes everything, meaning dirty pages tracking and
synchronization upon I/O operations to the disk.
The compile time using j=4 under Kemari was worse than that of j=2,
but I'm not sure this is due to dirty pages tracking or sync interval.
Do disk writes trigger synchronization? Otherwise this is a very
relaxed test. I'm surprised the degradation is so low running
continuously in log-dirty.
Is this an npt or ept system? Without npt or ept I'd expect less
degradation since the page tables are heavily manipulated anyway.
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
