From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] KVM: PPC: Virtualize Gekko guests Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:27:18 +0200 Message-ID: <4B7154A6.6050809@redhat.com> References: <1265298925-31954-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <4B6EB7F6.10304@redhat.com> <4B6EE8B2.80009@redhat.com> <4B6F3890.8090401@suse.de> <4B6FD118.2090207@redhat.com> <4B714049.7010201@suse.de> <4B7141B3.8000309@redhat.com> <4B71435E.7010103@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "kvm-ppc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "kvm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" To: Alexander Graf Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4B71435E.7010103-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 02/09/2010 01:13 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 02/09/2010 01:00 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >>> >>>> That's pretty impressive (never saw x86 with this exit rate) but it's >>>> more than 1000 times slower than the hardware, assuming 1 fpu IPC (and >>>> the processor can probably do more). An fpu intensive application >>>> will slow to a crawl. >>>> >>>> >>> Measuring a typical Gekko application, I get about 200k-250k of fpu >>> (incl. paired singles) instructions per second. >>> >>> >> Virtualized, yes? What's the rate on bare metal? >> > > Emulated. I can't measure anything on bare metal. > Well, then, the rate may be low due to virtualization overhead. Any way to compare absolute performance? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function