From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Theurer Subject: Re: scaling problem with writable pagetables Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 07:41:37 -0600 Message-ID: <43F48111.30201@us.ibm.com> References: <43F377D3.3020905@us.ibm.com> <6cc7be0ec36293dac6b8549c25e9d0be@cl.cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <6cc7be0ec36293dac6b8549c25e9d0be@cl.cam.ac.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Keir Fraser wrote: > > On 15 Feb 2006, at 18:49, Andrew Theurer wrote: > >> Below are per-function ratios of CPU time >> rev8830/rev8830-lock-reduction (derived from oprofile diffs) >> >> SDET: >> >> 9.84/1 restore_all_guest > > Kind of odd, since that function contains no locking. Perhaps VCPUs > are blocked so long that, by the time they get the CPU there is an > event pending and the hypercall gets preempted? I was a bit surprised at that, too. > > What do the perfctr numbers look like for #hypercalls and #exceptions? > Also worth adding one to __hypercall_create_continuation as that'll > count #preemptions. I have not taken perfctr numbers yet, but I will today. Thanks, -Andrew