From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xiao Guangrong Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] KVM: x86: optimize for writing guest page Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 11:42:41 +0800 Message-ID: <4EBC99B1.1030008@gmail.com> References: <4E7AF758.7060900@cn.fujitsu.com> <20111006175333.GA3959@amt.cnet> <4E8FCC37.8090409@cn.fujitsu.com> <4E91926D.8060206@redhat.com> <4E91A3AA.1000309@redhat.com> <4E940018.1010908@cn.fujitsu.com> <4EB3AD54.9050605@gmail.com> <4EB6A958.9030007@redhat.com> <4EBBD190.2020404@gmail.com> <4EBBDA3B.9040504@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Xiao Guangrong , Marcelo Tosatti , LKML , KVM To: Avi Kivity Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4EBBDA3B.9040504@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 11/10/2011 10:05 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 11/10/2011 03:28 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote: >> >> I have tested RHEL.6.1 setup/boot/reboot/shutdown and the complete >> output of scan_results.py is attached. >> >> The result shows the performance is improved: >> before: After: >> 570 529 >> 555 538 >> 552 531 >> 546 528 >> 553 559 >> 553 527 >> 550 523 >> 553 533 >> 547 538 >> 550 526 >> >> How do you think about it? :) > > Well, either I was sloppy in my measurements, or maybe RHEL 6 is very > different from F9 (unlikely). I'll measure it again and see. > Thanks for your time. :) > btw, this is with ept=0, yes? > Yeah.