From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH][retry 3] Add support for Pause Filtering to AMD SVM Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 15:00:33 +0300 Message-ID: <4A13F0E1.9040102@redhat.com> References: <200905050909.58583.mark.langsdorf@amd.com> <200905071000.14038.mark.langsdorf@amd.com> <200905081203.55484.mark.langsdorf@amd.com> <200905191356.37071.mark.langsdorf@amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Joerg Roedel , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Langsdorf Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:56429 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754744AbZETMAg (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2009 08:00:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200905191356.37071.mark.langsdorf@amd.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Mark Langsdorf wrote: > On a 24 core system running 4 guests each with 16 VCPUs, > this patch improved overall performance of each guest's > 32 job kernbench by approximately 1%. Further performance > improvement may be possible with a more sophisticated > yield algorithm. > > This result is approximately what you got on your previous patch. Did you measure with the new patch? approximately 1% seems to be too low. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function