On 05/07/2012 02:02 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 05/07/2012 11:29 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
This is looking pretty good and complete now - any objections
from anyone to trying this out in a separate x86 topic tree?
No objections, instead an
Acked-by: Avi Kivity<avi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thank you.
Here is a benchmark result with the patches.
3 guests with 8VCPU, 8GB RAM, 1 used for kernbench
(kernbench -f -H -M -o 20) other for cpuhog (shell script while
true with an instruction)
unpinned scenario
1x: no hogs
2x: 8hogs in one guest
3x: 8hogs each in two guest
BASE: 3.4-rc4 vanilla with CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCK=n
BASE+patch: 3.4-rc4 + debugfs + pv patches with CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCK=y
Machine : IBM xSeries with Intel(R) Xeon(R) x5570 2.93GHz CPU (Non PLE)
with 8 core , 64GB RAM
(Less is better. Below is time elapsed in sec for x86_64_defconfig (3+3
runs)).
BASE BASE+patch %improvement
mean (sd) mean (sd)
case 1x: 66.0566 (74.0304) 61.3233 (68.8299) 7.16552
case 2x: 1253.2 (1795.74) 131.606 (137.358) 89.4984
case 3x: 3431.04 (5297.26) 134.964 (149.861) 96.0664
Will be working on further analysis with other benchmarks
(pgbench/sysbench/ebizzy...) and further optimization.
--
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
