From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] Exit loop if we have been there too long
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 18:43:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3d3pmr9kf.fsf@trasno.mitica> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CF509C1.9@redhat.com> (Avi Kivity's message of "Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:27:13 +0200")
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/30/2010 04:17 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> What's the problem with burning that cpu? per guest page,
>>> compressing takes less than sending. Is it just an issue of qemu
>>> mutex hold time?
>>
>>
>> If you have a 512GB guest, then you have a 16MB dirty bitmap which
>> ends up being an 128MB dirty bitmap in QEMU because we represent
>> dirty bits with 8 bits.
>
> Was there not a patchset to split each bit into its own bitmap? And
> then copy the kvm or qemu master bitmap into each client bitmap as it
> became needed?
>
>> Walking 16mb (or 128mb) of memory just fine find a few pages to send
>> over the wire is a big waste of CPU time. If kvm.ko used a
>> multi-level table to represent dirty info, we could walk the memory
>> mapping at 2MB chunks allowing us to skip a large amount of the
>> comparisons.
>
> There's no reason to assume dirty pages would be clustered. If 0.2%
> of memory were dirty, but scattered uniformly, there would be no win
> from the two-level bitmap. A loss, in fact: 2MB can be represented as
> 512 bits or 64 bytes, just one cache line. Any two-level thing will
> need more.
>
> We might have a more compact encoding for sparse bitmaps, like
> run-length encoding.
I haven't measured it, but I think that it would be much better that
way. When we start, it don't matter too much (everything is dirty),
what we should optimize for is the last rounds, and in the last rounds
it would be much better to ask kvm:
fill this array of dirty pages offsets, and be done with it.
Not sure if adding a size field would improve things, both tests need to
be measured.
What would be a winner independent of that is a way to ask qemu the
number of dirty pages. Just now we need to calculate them walking the
bitmap (one of my patches just simplifies this).
Adding the feature to qemu means that we could always give recent
information to "info migrate" without incurring in a big cost.
>> BTW, we should also refactor qemu to use the kvm dirty bitmap
>> directly instead of mapping it to the main dirty bitmap.
>
> That's what the patch set I was alluding to did. Or maybe I imagined
> the whole thing.
it existed. And today would be easier because KQEMU and VGA are not
needed anymore.
>>>> We also need to implement live migration in a separate thread that
>>>> doesn't carry qemu_mutex while it runs.
>>>
>>> IMO that's the biggest hit currently.
>>
>> Yup. That's the Correct solution to the problem.
>
> Then let's just Do it.
Will take a look at splittingthe qemu_mutex bit.
Later, Juan.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 09/10] Exit loop if we have been there too long
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 18:43:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3d3pmr9kf.fsf@trasno.mitica> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CF509C1.9@redhat.com> (Avi Kivity's message of "Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:27:13 +0200")
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/30/2010 04:17 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> What's the problem with burning that cpu? per guest page,
>>> compressing takes less than sending. Is it just an issue of qemu
>>> mutex hold time?
>>
>>
>> If you have a 512GB guest, then you have a 16MB dirty bitmap which
>> ends up being an 128MB dirty bitmap in QEMU because we represent
>> dirty bits with 8 bits.
>
> Was there not a patchset to split each bit into its own bitmap? And
> then copy the kvm or qemu master bitmap into each client bitmap as it
> became needed?
>
>> Walking 16mb (or 128mb) of memory just fine find a few pages to send
>> over the wire is a big waste of CPU time. If kvm.ko used a
>> multi-level table to represent dirty info, we could walk the memory
>> mapping at 2MB chunks allowing us to skip a large amount of the
>> comparisons.
>
> There's no reason to assume dirty pages would be clustered. If 0.2%
> of memory were dirty, but scattered uniformly, there would be no win
> from the two-level bitmap. A loss, in fact: 2MB can be represented as
> 512 bits or 64 bytes, just one cache line. Any two-level thing will
> need more.
>
> We might have a more compact encoding for sparse bitmaps, like
> run-length encoding.
I haven't measured it, but I think that it would be much better that
way. When we start, it don't matter too much (everything is dirty),
what we should optimize for is the last rounds, and in the last rounds
it would be much better to ask kvm:
fill this array of dirty pages offsets, and be done with it.
Not sure if adding a size field would improve things, both tests need to
be measured.
What would be a winner independent of that is a way to ask qemu the
number of dirty pages. Just now we need to calculate them walking the
bitmap (one of my patches just simplifies this).
Adding the feature to qemu means that we could always give recent
information to "info migrate" without incurring in a big cost.
>> BTW, we should also refactor qemu to use the kvm dirty bitmap
>> directly instead of mapping it to the main dirty bitmap.
>
> That's what the patch set I was alluding to did. Or maybe I imagined
> the whole thing.
it existed. And today would be easier because KQEMU and VGA are not
needed anymore.
>>>> We also need to implement live migration in a separate thread that
>>>> doesn't carry qemu_mutex while it runs.
>>>
>>> IMO that's the biggest hit currently.
>>
>> Yup. That's the Correct solution to the problem.
>
> Then let's just Do it.
Will take a look at splittingthe qemu_mutex bit.
Later, Juan.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-30 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 92+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-23 23:02 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/10] Fix migration with lots of memory Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:02 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 01/10] Add spent time to migration Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:02 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 02/10] Add buffered_file_internal constant Juan Quintela
2010-11-24 10:40 ` [Qemu-devel] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-24 10:52 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-24 11:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-24 11:13 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-24 11:19 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
[not found] ` <4CF46012.2060804@codemonkey.ws>
2010-11-30 11:56 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-30 14:02 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 14:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-30 14:22 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 15:40 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-30 16:10 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-30 16:32 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-30 16:44 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 18:04 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-30 18:54 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 19:15 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-30 20:23 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 20:56 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 03/10] Add printf debug to savevm Juan Quintela
[not found] ` <4CF45AB2.7050506@codemonkey.ws>
2010-11-30 10:36 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2010-11-30 22:40 ` [Qemu-devel] " Juan Quintela
2010-12-01 7:50 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2010-11-23 23:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 04/10] No need to iterate if we already are over the limit Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/10] KVM don't care about TLB handling Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 06/10] Only calculate expected_time for stage 2 Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 07/10] ram_save_remaining() returns an uint64_t Juan Quintela
[not found] ` <4CF45C0C.705@codemonkey.ws>
2010-11-30 7:21 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2010-11-30 13:44 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 14:38 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 08/10] Count nanoseconds with uint64_t not doubles Juan Quintela
2010-11-30 7:17 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
[not found] ` <4CF45C5B.9080507@codemonkey.ws>
2010-11-30 14:40 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 09/10] Exit loop if we have been there too long Juan Quintela
2010-11-24 10:40 ` [Qemu-devel] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-24 11:01 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-24 11:14 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-24 15:16 ` Paolo Bonzini
2010-11-24 15:59 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
[not found] ` <4CF45E3F.4040609@codemonkey.ws>
2010-11-30 8:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2010-11-30 13:26 ` Juan Quintela
[not found] ` <4CF45D67.5010906@codemonkey.ws>
2010-11-30 7:15 ` Paolo Bonzini
2010-11-30 13:47 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 13:47 ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 13:58 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-30 13:58 ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-11-30 14:17 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 14:17 ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 14:27 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-30 14:27 ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-11-30 14:50 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 14:50 ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2010-12-01 12:40 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-01 12:40 ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-11-30 17:43 ` Juan Quintela [this message]
2010-11-30 17:43 ` Juan Quintela
2010-12-01 1:20 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2010-12-01 1:20 ` [Qemu-devel] " Takuya Yoshikawa
2010-12-01 1:52 ` Juan Quintela
2010-12-01 1:52 ` [Qemu-devel] " Juan Quintela
2010-12-01 2:22 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2010-12-01 2:22 ` [Qemu-devel] " Takuya Yoshikawa
2010-12-01 12:35 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-01 12:35 ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-12-01 13:45 ` Juan Quintela
2010-12-01 13:45 ` [Qemu-devel] " Juan Quintela
2010-12-02 1:31 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2010-12-02 1:31 ` [Qemu-devel] " Takuya Yoshikawa
2010-12-02 8:37 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-02 8:37 ` [Qemu-devel] " Avi Kivity
2010-11-30 14:12 ` Paolo Bonzini
2010-11-30 14:12 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2010-11-30 15:00 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 15:00 ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2010-11-30 17:59 ` Juan Quintela
2010-11-30 17:59 ` [Qemu-devel] " Juan Quintela
2010-11-23 23:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 10/10] Maintaing number of dirty pages Juan Quintela
[not found] ` <4CF45DE0.8020701@codemonkey.ws>
2010-11-30 14:46 ` [Qemu-devel] " Juan Quintela
2010-12-01 14:46 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-01 15:51 ` Juan Quintela
2010-12-01 15:55 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-12-01 16:25 ` Juan Quintela
2010-12-01 16:33 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-12-01 16:43 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-01 16:49 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-12-01 16:52 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-01 16:56 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-12-01 17:01 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-01 17:05 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-12-01 18:51 ` Juan Quintela
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=m3d3pmr9kf.fsf@trasno.mitica \
--to=quintela@redhat.com \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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.