From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] KVM: optimize memslots searching
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:54:33 +0800
Message-ID: <4EC9CB79.9030905@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <4EC6226B.3080408@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4EC8E48B.9080204@redhat.com> <4EC8EECB.7070706@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <4EC8EECB.7070706@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 11/20/2011 08:12 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:

> On 11/20/2011 01:29 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 11/18/2011 11:16 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>> This is the more work base on my v1 patchset which is posted some months ago,
>>> it can be found at:
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/22/68
>>>
>>> Change log:
>>> - sort memslots base on its size and do the line search instead of binary
>>>   search base on gfn, it is from Avi's idea.
>>> - in order to reduce cache footprint, memslots are sorted in the array of
>>>   kvm->memslots->memslots[] and introduce a table to map slot id to index in
>>>   the array
>>>
>>> There is the performance result:
>>>
>>> autotest for RHEL.6.1 setup/boot/reboot/shutdown(average):
>>> ept=1:	before: 449.5	after: 447.8
>>> ept=0:	before: 532.7	after: 529.8
>>>
>>> kernbench(average):
>>> ept=1:	before: 127.94	after: 126.98
>>> ept=0:	before: 196.85	after: 189.66
>>
>> Looks good, had a couple of comments but they're really minor.
>>
> 
> btw, this patchset touches a lot of common code.  Did you crossbuild for
> other kvm archs?
> 


No :-), but i will build cross compilation environment and test it next time,
thanks!