From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
Xen-devel List <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: More RTC issues with Win2k3
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 14:37:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <522737AF.9080404@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5227476702000078000F0571@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
On 04/09/13 13:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 04.09.13 at 14:34, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 04/09/13 10:38, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> Which raises two questions: Does that specific version of Windows
>>> not honor the WAET flags saying that REG_C reads are unnecessary?
>>> Or does this only occur during very early boot (where iirc a first,
>>> temporary RTC interrupt handler gets installed for a very brief period
>>> of time that doesn't pay attention to the WAET flag)?
>> When the VM falls into the loop, it is still in text mode with "Starting
>> windows..." and a block progress bar which is full. This means that
>> ntldr has finished loading the base drivers using int 13h. From
>> Xentrace, we do see that it is in 64 bit mode, so execution is probably
>> right at the beginning of the kernel, even before switching the VGA mode.
> So that might then be the early probing interrupt handler that I
> had found they install transiently.
>
>>>> I have attached xen-hvmctx from the affected domain, and do have one
>>>> example of a VM in this loop so can poke for other state, if there are
>>>> any sensible suggestions
>>> The REG_A value says 64Hz for the periodic interrupt if I'm not
>>> mistaken, so RTC_PF getting re-set between two iterations would
>>> first of all hint at a significantly overcommitted system (such that
>>> no two iterations of the loop can complete within 1/64 second).
>> This is part of our automatic testing. There are two VMs (32 and 64bit
>> variants) running the same set of tests, being basic lifecycle/migrate
>> etc loops. The hosts are not overcommitted in the slightest.
> In which case, unless there's some scheduler anomaly involved, I
> see no explanation for the behavior.
>
> Not knowing what precise data Xentrace produces - does that include
> any timing information? If so, what's the smallest delta between two
> of these REG_C reads?
>
> Jan
>
Yes. Here is a larger sample:
] 2.862018629 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814176
2.862018629 d98v0 io write port 70 val c
] 2.862019461 d98v0 vmentry cycles 1996
] 2.862019936 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814177
2.862019936 d98v0 io read port 71 val c0
] 2.862021275 d98v0 vmentry cycles 3214
] 2.862021752 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814176
2.862021752 d98v0 io write port 70 val c
] 2.862022560 d98v0 vmentry cycles 1938
] 2.862023068 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814177
2.862023068 d98v0 io read port 71 val c0
] 2.862024410 d98v0 vmentry cycles 3220
] 2.862024886 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814176
2.862024886 d98v0 io write port 70 val c
] 2.862025735 d98v0 vmentry cycles 2037
] 2.862026207 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814177
2.862026207 d98v0 io read port 71 val c0
] 2.862027537 d98v0 vmentry cycles 3190
] 2.862028012 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814176
2.862028012 d98v0 io write port 70 val c
] 2.862028854 d98v0 vmentry cycles 2021
] 2.862029322 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814177
2.862029322 d98v0 io read port 71 val c0
] 2.862030668 d98v0 vmentry cycles 3232
] 2.862031145 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814176
2.862031145 d98v0 io write port 70 val c
] 2.862031954 d98v0 vmentry cycles 1941
] 2.862032462 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814177
2.862032462 d98v0 io read port 71 val c0
] 2.862033762 d98v0 vmentry cycles 3118
] 2.862034233 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814176
2.862034233 d98v0 io write port 70 val c
] 2.862035082 d98v0 vmentry cycles 2036
] 2.862035558 d98v0 vmexit exit_reason IO_INSTRUCTION eip fffff80000814177
2.862035558 d98v0 io read port 71 val c0
] 2.862036937 d98v0 vmentry cycles 3309
George will know for certain, but as far as I am aware, the timestamp
column is calculated from raw TSC counter values embedded in the trace
records.
Either way, it is on the order of 2 microseconds difference around
iterations of the loops, with a substantial proportion of that being
vmextry/vmexit.
As an easy starting point of reference, I will completely disable
writing the WAET table to see whether that makes a difference.
~Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-04 13:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-03 13:37 More RTC issues with Win2k3 Andrew Cooper
2013-09-04 9:38 ` Jan Beulich
2013-09-04 12:34 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-09-04 12:44 ` Jan Beulich
2013-09-04 13:37 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2013-09-04 14:13 ` Jan Beulich
2013-09-04 15:09 ` George Dunlap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=522737AF.9080404@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.