Re: [PATCH RFC V4 0/5] kvm : Paravirt-spinlock support for KVM guests

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

 



* Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> [2012-01-16 04:57:45]:

> Speaking of which - have you benchmarked performance degradation of pv ticket locks on bare metal?

You mean, run kernel on bare metal with CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS
enabled and compare how it performs with CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS disabled for 
some workload(s)?

In some sense, the 1x overcommitcase results posted does measure the overhead
of (pv-)spinlocks no? We don't see any overhead in that case for atleast
kernbench ..

> Result for Non PLE machine :
> ============================

[snip]

> Kernbench:
>                BASE                    BASE+patch
>                %improvement
>                mean (sd)               mean (sd)
> Scenario A:
> case 1x:	 164.233 (16.5506)	 163.584 (15.4598	0.39517

[snip]

> Result for PLE machine:
> ======================

[snip]
> Kernbench:
>                BASE                    BASE+patch
>                %improvement
>                mean (sd)               mean (sd)
> Scenario A:
> case 1x:	 161.263 (56.518)        159.635 (40.5621)	1.00953

- vatsa

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization


[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux