From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: performance with guests running 2.4 kernels (specifically RHEL3) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:55:52 +0300 Message-ID: <48184228.2020701@qumranet.com> References: <48054518.3000104@cisco.com> <4805BCF1.6040605@qumranet.com> <4807BD53.6020304@cisco.com> <48085485.3090205@qumranet.com> <480C188F.3020101@cisco.com> <480C5C39.4040300@qumranet.com> <480E492B.3060500@cisco.com> <480EEDA0.3080209@qumranet.com> <480F546C.2030608@cisco.com> <481215DE.3000302@cisco.com> <20080428181550.GA3965@dmt> <4816617F.3080403@cisco.com> <4817F30C.6050308@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel , Marcelo Tosatti To: "David S. Ahern" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4817F30C.6050308@cisco.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org David S. Ahern wrote: > Another tidbit for you guys as I make my way through various permutations: > I installed the RHEL3 hugemem kernel and the guest behavior is *much* better. > System time still has some regular hiccups that are higher than xen and esx > (e.g., 1 minute samples out of 5 show system time between 10 and 15%), but > overall guest behavior is good with the hugemem kernel. > > Wait, the amount of info here is overwhelming. Let's stick with the current kernel (32-bit, HIGHMEM4G, right?) Did you get any traces with bypass_guest_pf=0? That may show more info. -- Any sufficiently difficult bug is indistinguishable from a feature. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone