From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Guthro Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.1.1 -- initial patchqueue Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:28:57 -0400 Message-ID: <46E53889.8000700@virtualiron.com> References: <46E5362D.4020404@virtualiron.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <46E5362D.4020404@virtualiron.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-ppc-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-ppc-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-ia64-devel , xen-devel , xen-ppc-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Also - what tool are you using to apply these patches? mercurial queues seem to be incompatible with some of the non utf-8 characters in some of the patches: applying 15075-5efb46bfbcac applying 15076-9ec165fa8128 applying 15077-711bfe07999b applying 15078-6145e5508d6b abort: decoding near 'Ingard Mev�g Keir Fraser wrote: >> On 10/9/07 13:03, "Ben Guthro" wrote: >> >>> 15185-1f8fb764f843 >>> http://xenbits.xensource.com/xen-unstable.hg?rev/1f8fb764f843 >> I'm inclined not to backport this one. >> > If I recall - It applied against our 3.1 tree without any > backporting...we just exported, and applied it. It increased > performance on Caneland machines greatly. Test results against our 3.1 > based product below: > > > At Ben's request, I did a quick evaluation of the APIC TPR patch for > Caneland. > I used yesterday's build to establish a baseline for booting, running > SPECjbb2005, and > netperf on a SMP XP guest. I then repeated the tests with a custom > kernel. The patch > showed significant improvement for 2 of the 3 tests I used. Here are > the results: > > Test 20070816 Patch % Improvement > Boot time - Seconds 62.6 40.5 35% > SPECjbb2005 OPs/Sec 35216 35686 1% > TCP XMIT (MBits/sec) 70.2 309.5 341% > TCP RCV (MBits/Sec) 122.3 423.5 246% > > These tests were done on a Caneland, with 4 quad-core sockets and 32GB > of memory. > The guest is Windows XP Professional with SP2, 2 CPUs, 2GB memory. > This afternoon, > I'll repeat the experiment on a non-Caneland machine to see if there > are any > side effects. > > > >> The two Linux changesets are not applicable to 3.1. > Yes, of course...my mistake. I forgot to weed out my "unstable-only" > patches from the list. > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel