* KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host @ 2011-09-06 14:02 Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 15:13 ` Avi Kivity 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 14:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: kvm; +Cc: nikola.ciprich [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1452 bytes --] Hello, I'm trying to solve quite a weird problem on one of our customers' box. It's quad core Xeon X3430 @ 2.40GHz, running 64bit centos with 2.6.38 (I also tried upgrading to 2.6.39). After increasing physical memory from 16 to 20GB, all guest got incredibly slow, starting just one windows or linux guest causes host to be quite slow, and quest seems to be even slower. hardware virtualisation is on, KVM is used, no relevant update since the update. here's about 3 seconds of kvm_stat: kvm_exit 659513 103922 kvm_entry 659505 103920 kvm_emulate_insn 631118 99344 kvm_exit(IO_INSTRUCTION) 625223 98398 kvm_userspace_exit 624979 98359 kvm_pio 624970 98357 but according to atop, there is almost no I/O activity from guests, and running top in them shows them to really be idle... but they eat like 60-70% of host CPU core time each.. Do You have any idea on what should I check? thanks a lot in advance nik -- ------------------------------------- Ing. Nikola CIPRICH LinuxBox.cz, s.r.o. 28. rijna 168, 709 01 Ostrava tel.: +420 596 603 142 fax: +420 596 621 273 mobil: +420 777 093 799 www.linuxbox.cz mobil servis: +420 737 238 656 email servis: servis@linuxbox.cz ------------------------------------- [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 14:02 KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 15:13 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 15:38 ` Nikola Ciprich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikola Ciprich; +Cc: kvm On 09/06/2011 05:02 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to solve quite a weird problem on one of our customers' box. > It's quad core Xeon X3430 @ 2.40GHz, running 64bit centos with 2.6.38 (I also tried upgrading to > 2.6.39). > After increasing physical memory from 16 to 20GB, all guest got incredibly slow, starting just > one windows or linux guest causes host to be quite slow, and quest seems to be even slower. > hardware virtualisation is on, KVM is used, no relevant update since the update. > here's about 3 seconds of kvm_stat: > > kvm_exit 659513 103922 > kvm_entry 659505 103920 > kvm_emulate_insn 631118 99344 > kvm_exit(IO_INSTRUCTION) 625223 98398 > kvm_userspace_exit 624979 98359 > kvm_pio 624970 98357 How many guests in there? Please post a trace as per http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tracing. > but according to atop, there is almost no I/O activity from guests, and running top in them > shows them to really be idle... > but they eat like 60-70% of host CPU core time each.. > > Do You have any idea on what should I check? > thanks a lot in advance Please post /proc/mtrr and /proc/iomem. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 15:13 ` Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 15:38 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 15:45 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:08 ` KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host Avi Kivity 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: kvm [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3312 bytes --] Hello Avi, thanks for quick reply! > How many guests in there? two currently (one x86_64 centos, one winXP), with more, the box get even more unresponsive. > > Please post a trace as per http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tracing. here it goes: http://nelide.cz/nik/trace.dat.bz2 > > Please post /proc/mtrr and /proc/iomem. [root@virtualbox ~]# cat /proc/mtrr reg00: base=0x000000000 ( 0MB), size=16384MB, count=1: write-back reg01: base=0x400000000 (16384MB), size= 4096MB, count=1: write-back reg02: base=0x500000000 (20480MB), size= 1024MB, count=1: write-back reg03: base=0x0c0000000 ( 3072MB), size= 1024MB, count=1: uncachable [root@virtualbox ~]# cat /proc/iomem 00000000-0000ffff : reserved 00010000-0009d7ff : System RAM 0009d800-0009ffff : reserved 000a0000-000bffff : PCI Bus 0000:00 000c0000-000cffff : pnp 00:0f 000d0000-000dffff : PCI Bus 0000:00 000e0000-000fffff : reserved 00100000-bf78ffff : System RAM 01000000-013917ae : Kernel code 013917af-016c88ff : Kernel data 0176a000-0182ffff : Kernel bss bf790000-bf79dfff : RAM buffer bf79e000-bf79ffff : reserved bf7a0000-bf7adfff : ACPI Tables bf7ae000-bf7cffff : ACPI Non-volatile Storage bf7d0000-bf7dffff : reserved bf7e0000-bf7ecfff : RAM buffer bf7ed000-bfffffff : reserved c0000000-dfffffff : PCI Bus 0000:00 c0000000-c01fffff : PCI Bus 0000:08 c0200000-c03fffff : PCI Bus 0000:07 c0400000-c05fffff : PCI Bus 0000:06 c0600000-c07fffff : PCI Bus 0000:06 e0000000-efffffff : PCI MMCONFIG 0000 [bus 00-ff] e0000000-efffffff : reserved e0000000-efffffff : pnp 00:0e f0000000-fed8ffff : PCI Bus 0000:00 fa000000-faffffff : PCI Bus 0000:09 fa000000-faffffff : 0000:09:03.0 fb4f6000-fb4f60ff : 0000:00:1f.3 fb4f8000-fb4f87ff : 0000:00:1f.2 fb4f8000-fb4f87ff : ahci fb4fa000-fb4fa3ff : 0000:00:1d.0 fb4fa000-fb4fa3ff : ehci_hcd fb4fc000-fb4fc3ff : 0000:00:1a.0 fb4fc000-fb4fc3ff : ehci_hcd fb500000-fb5fffff : PCI Bus 0000:07 fb5dc000-fb5dffff : 0000:07:00.0 fb5dc000-fb5dffff : e1000e fb5e0000-fb5fffff : 0000:07:00.0 fb5e0000-fb5fffff : e1000e fb600000-fb6fffff : PCI Bus 0000:08 fb6dc000-fb6dffff : 0000:08:00.0 fb6dc000-fb6dffff : e1000e fb6e0000-fb6fffff : 0000:08:00.0 fb6e0000-fb6fffff : e1000e fb700000-fbffffff : PCI Bus 0000:09 fb7fc000-fb7fffff : 0000:09:03.0 fb800000-fbffffff : 0000:09:03.0 fc000000-fcffffff : pnp 00:01 fd000000-fdffffff : pnp 00:01 fe000000-febfffff : pnp 00:01 fec00000-fec003ff : IOAPIC 0 fed00000-fed003ff : HPET 0 fed14000-fed19fff : pnp 00:01 fed1c000-fed1ffff : pnp 00:0b fed20000-fed3ffff : reserved fed20000-fed3ffff : pnp 00:0b fed40000-fed8ffff : pnp 00:0b fee00000-fee00fff : Local APIC fee00000-fee00fff : reserved fee00000-fee00fff : pnp 00:0d 100000000-53fffffff : System RAM n. > > -- > error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function > -- ------------------------------------- Ing. Nikola CIPRICH LinuxBox.cz, s.r.o. 28. rijna 168, 709 01 Ostrava tel.: +420 596 603 142 fax: +420 596 621 273 mobil: +420 777 093 799 www.linuxbox.cz mobil servis: +420 737 238 656 email servis: servis@linuxbox.cz ------------------------------------- [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 15:38 ` Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 15:45 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:01 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 16:08 ` KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host Avi Kivity 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikola Ciprich; +Cc: kvm On 09/06/2011 06:38 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > Hello Avi, > thanks for quick reply! > > > How many guests in there? > two currently (one x86_64 centos, one winXP), with more, the box get even more unresponsive. > > > > > Please post a trace as per http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tracing. > here it goes: > http://nelide.cz/nik/trace.dat.bz2 404 > > > > > Please post /proc/mtrr and /proc/iomem. > [root@virtualbox ~]# cat /proc/mtrr > reg00: base=0x000000000 ( 0MB), size=16384MB, count=1: write-back > reg01: base=0x400000000 (16384MB), size= 4096MB, count=1: write-back > reg02: base=0x500000000 (20480MB), size= 1024MB, count=1: write-back > reg03: base=0x0c0000000 ( 3072MB), size= 1024MB, count=1: uncachable > > These seem fine - all your memory is write-back. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 15:45 ` Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 16:01 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: kvm [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 941 bytes --] > 404 ouch, dumb me :-/ http://nelide.cz/downloads/nik/trace.dat.bz2 sorry n. > >> >> > >> > Please post /proc/mtrr and /proc/iomem. >> [root@virtualbox ~]# cat /proc/mtrr >> reg00: base=0x000000000 ( 0MB), size=16384MB, count=1: write-back >> reg01: base=0x400000000 (16384MB), size= 4096MB, count=1: write-back >> reg02: base=0x500000000 (20480MB), size= 1024MB, count=1: write-back >> reg03: base=0x0c0000000 ( 3072MB), size= 1024MB, count=1: uncachable >> >> > > These seem fine - all your memory is write-back. > > -- > error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function > -- ------------------------------------- Ing. Nikola CIPRICH LinuxBox.cz, s.r.o. 28. rijna 168, 709 01 Ostrava tel.: +420 596 603 142 fax: +420 596 621 273 mobil: +420 777 093 799 www.linuxbox.cz mobil servis: +420 737 238 656 email servis: servis@linuxbox.cz ------------------------------------- [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 16:01 ` Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:10 ` Gleb Natapov 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikola Ciprich; +Cc: kvm, Gleb Natapov On 09/06/2011 07:01 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > > 404 > ouch, dumb me :-/ > http://nelide.cz/downloads/nik/trace.dat.bz2 > sorry > n. > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803169: kvm_emulate_insn: 0:806edb12: rep outsw qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803170: kvm_pio: pio_write at 0x1f0 size 2 count 1 qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803171: kvm_userspace_exit: reason KVM_EXIT_IO (2) qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803186: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803189: kvm_exit: reason IO_INSTRUCTION rip 0x806edb12 info 1f00031 0 qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803191: kvm_emulate_insn: 0:806edb12: rep outsw qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803192: kvm_pio: pio_write at 0x1f0 size 2 count 1 qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803193: kvm_userspace_exit: reason KVM_EXIT_IO (2) qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803195: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803198: kvm_exit: reason IO_INSTRUCTION rip 0x806edb12 info 1f00031 0 One of your guests is using IDE PIO instead of DMA. Switch it back to DMA. Gleb, is rep/outsw our pio regression or was it another instruction? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:10 ` Gleb Natapov 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikola Ciprich; +Cc: kvm, Gleb Natapov On 09/06/2011 07:06 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 09/06/2011 07:01 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote: >> > 404 >> ouch, dumb me :-/ >> http://nelide.cz/downloads/nik/trace.dat.bz2 >> sorry >> n. >> > > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803169: kvm_emulate_insn: > 0:806edb12: rep outsw > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803170: kvm_pio: > pio_write at 0x1f0 size 2 count 1 > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803171: kvm_userspace_exit: > reason KVM_EXIT_IO (2) > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803186: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803189: kvm_exit: > reason IO_INSTRUCTION rip 0x806edb12 info 1f00031 0 > > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803191: kvm_emulate_insn: > 0:806edb12: rep outsw > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803192: kvm_pio: > pio_write at 0x1f0 size 2 count 1 > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803193: kvm_userspace_exit: > reason KVM_EXIT_IO (2) > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803195: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803198: kvm_exit: > reason IO_INSTRUCTION rip 0x806edb12 info 1f00031 0 > > > One of your guests is using IDE PIO instead of DMA. Switch it back to > DMA. Even better, switch it to virtio. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 16:10 ` Gleb Natapov 2011-09-06 16:30 ` Nikola Ciprich 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Gleb Natapov @ 2011-09-06 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: Nikola Ciprich, kvm On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 07:06:34PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 09/06/2011 07:01 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > >> 404 > >ouch, dumb me :-/ > >http://nelide.cz/downloads/nik/trace.dat.bz2 > >sorry > >n. > > > > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803169: kvm_emulate_insn: > 0:806edb12: rep outsw > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803170: kvm_pio: > pio_write at 0x1f0 size 2 count 1 > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803171: kvm_userspace_exit: > reason KVM_EXIT_IO (2) > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803186: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803189: kvm_exit: > reason IO_INSTRUCTION rip 0x806edb12 info 1f00031 0 > > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803191: kvm_emulate_insn: > 0:806edb12: rep outsw > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803192: kvm_pio: > pio_write at 0x1f0 size 2 count 1 > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803193: kvm_userspace_exit: > reason KVM_EXIT_IO (2) > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803195: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 > qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803198: kvm_exit: > reason IO_INSTRUCTION rip 0x806edb12 info 1f00031 0 > > > One of your guests is using IDE PIO instead of DMA. Switch it back to DMA. > > Gleb, is rep/outsw our pio regression or was it another instruction? > It is rep/in-out. But why it became noticeable only after adding more physical memory to the host is a mystery. -- Gleb. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 16:10 ` Gleb Natapov @ 2011-09-06 16:30 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 17:01 ` Avi Kivity 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gleb Natapov; +Cc: Avi Kivity, kvm [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1025 bytes --] OK, seems like Avi's right, at least the windows guest is not using DMA though the question is, why did it got disabled and how can I reenable it, I'm not experienced that much with XP :( > It is rep/in-out. But why it became noticeable only after adding more > physical memory to the host is a mystery. now that I'm thinking about it, we had similar problem in the past, the windows guest was unusably slow, and the whole host was slow as well... upgrading to 0.14.1 seemingly solved this issue, but maybe the DMA just got randomly enabled, and now after adding the memory (and restarting of course), it just got disabled again? but why could this be?? > > -- > Gleb. > -- ------------------------------------- Ing. Nikola CIPRICH LinuxBox.cz, s.r.o. 28. rijna 168, 709 01 Ostrava tel.: +420 596 603 142 fax: +420 596 621 273 mobil: +420 777 093 799 www.linuxbox.cz mobil servis: +420 737 238 656 email servis: servis@linuxbox.cz ------------------------------------- [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 16:30 ` Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 17:01 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 19:22 ` KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host - SOLVED Nikola Ciprich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 17:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikola Ciprich; +Cc: Gleb Natapov, kvm On 09/06/2011 07:30 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > OK, seems like Avi's right, at least the windows guest is not using DMA > though the question is, why did it got disabled It can happen due to a timeout, perhaps a temporary load spike. > and how can I reenable it, Google knows. > I'm not experienced that much with XP :( > > > > It is rep/in-out. But why it became noticeable only after adding more > > physical memory to the host is a mystery. > > now that I'm thinking about it, we had similar problem in the past, the windows guest > was unusably slow, and the whole host was slow as well... upgrading to 0.14.1 seemingly > solved this issue, but maybe the DMA just got randomly enabled, and now after adding > the memory (and restarting of course), it just got disabled again? > but why could this be?? > I don't think it's related to the memory. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host - SOLVED 2011-09-06 17:01 ` Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 19:22 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-08 14:58 ` Michael Tokarev 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-06 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: Gleb Natapov, kvm, pavel.miklik, lukas.deseyve [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2522 bytes --] Hello guys, thanks to both of You for Your replies. The problem is solved, exactly as Avi said, the DMA in windows got somehow disabled. So this certainly was not related to adding the memory... anyways, note for further generations: in windows XP, the DMA usage can be checked in Device Manager->IDE ATA/ATAPI Controllers -> Properties->Advanced Settings Current Transfer Mode must be Multi-Word DMA2 or something similar, NOT PIO! The way I enabled this, was to uninstall both primary and secondary controller in device controller, then also uninstall Intel controller, and THEN rebooting (NOT sooner!) after reboot, controllers got detected and installed again, with DMA properly enabled. Note that when controller is in PIO mode, this is really a patience test, switching to DMA took me like half an hour to complete, so slow the system was :-/ So thanks a lot for Your help once more. have a nice day. nik On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 08:01:47PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 09/06/2011 07:30 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote: >> OK, seems like Avi's right, at least the windows guest is not using DMA >> though the question is, why did it got disabled > > It can happen due to a timeout, perhaps a temporary load spike. > >> and how can I reenable it, > > Google knows. > >> I'm not experienced that much with XP :( >> >> >> > It is rep/in-out. But why it became noticeable only after adding more >> > physical memory to the host is a mystery. >> >> now that I'm thinking about it, we had similar problem in the past, the windows guest >> was unusably slow, and the whole host was slow as well... upgrading to 0.14.1 seemingly >> solved this issue, but maybe the DMA just got randomly enabled, and now after adding >> the memory (and restarting of course), it just got disabled again? >> but why could this be?? >> > > I don't think it's related to the memory. > > -- > error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- ------------------------------------- Ing. Nikola CIPRICH LinuxBox.cz, s.r.o. 28. rijna 168, 709 01 Ostrava tel.: +420 596 603 142 fax: +420 596 621 273 mobil: +420 777 093 799 www.linuxbox.cz mobil servis: +420 737 238 656 email servis: servis@linuxbox.cz ------------------------------------- [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host - SOLVED 2011-09-06 19:22 ` KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host - SOLVED Nikola Ciprich @ 2011-09-08 14:58 ` Michael Tokarev 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Michael Tokarev @ 2011-09-08 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikola Ciprich; +Cc: Avi Kivity, Gleb Natapov, kvm, pavel.miklik, lukas.deseyve On 06.09.2011 23:22, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > Hello guys, > > thanks to both of You for Your replies. The problem is solved, > exactly as Avi said, the DMA in windows got somehow disabled. > So this certainly was not related to adding the memory... > > anyways, note for further generations: > in windows XP, the DMA usage can be checked in > Device Manager->IDE ATA/ATAPI Controllers -> Properties->Advanced Settings > Current Transfer Mode must be Multi-Word DMA2 or something similar, > NOT PIO! > > The way I enabled this, was to uninstall both primary and secondary controller > in device controller, then also uninstall Intel controller, and THEN rebooting (NOT sooner!) > after reboot, controllers got detected and installed again, with DMA properly enabled. > Note that when controller is in PIO mode, this is really a patience test, switching to DMA took > me like half an hour to complete, so slow the system was :-/ You can open regedit and search for "NoIDE" - it should find one key with that name, with value "1" or "yes" - just delete it, there's no need to go that route with removing/reinstalling device drivers. The reason why it has been disabled is - most likely - due to some timeout while handling i/o -- eg, when your host was loaded too much or were swapping - you should be able to find something about that in windows event log. /mjt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host 2011-09-06 15:38 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 15:45 ` Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 16:08 ` Avi Kivity 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-09-06 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikola Ciprich; +Cc: kvm On 09/06/2011 06:38 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > Hello Avi, > thanks for quick reply! > > > How many guests in there? > two currently (one x86_64 centos, one winXP), with more, the box get even more unresponsive. > I don't really understand why the box is unresponsive. What do top and 'vmstat 1' say? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-09-08 14:58 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-09-06 14:02 KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 15:13 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 15:38 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 15:45 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:01 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:06 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 16:10 ` Gleb Natapov 2011-09-06 16:30 ` Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-06 17:01 ` Avi Kivity 2011-09-06 19:22 ` KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host - SOLVED Nikola Ciprich 2011-09-08 14:58 ` Michael Tokarev 2011-09-06 16:08 ` KVM got slow after adding more physical memory to host Avi Kivity
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox