Re: [PATCH] kvm: handle last_boosted_vcpu = 0 case

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/28/2012 09:30 PM, Andrew Jones wrote:


----- Original Message -----
In summary, current PV has huge benefit on non-PLE machine.

On PLE machine, the results become very sensitive to load, type of
workload and SPIN_THRESHOLD. Also PLE interference has significant
effect on them. But still it has slight edge over non PV.


Hi Raghu,

sorry for my slow response. I'm on vacation right now (until the
9th of July) and I have limited access to mail.

Ok. Happy Vacation :)

Also, thanks for
continuing the benchmarking. Question, when you compare PLE vs.
non-PLE, are you using different machines (one with and one
without), or are you disabling its use by loading the kvm module
with the ple_gap=0 modparam as I did?

Yes, I am doing the same when I say with PLE disabled and comparing the
benchmarks (i.e loading kvm module with ple_gap=0).

But older non-PLE results were on a different machine altogether. (I
had limited access to PLE machine).


--
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


[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux