From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xiao Guangrong Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/16] KVM: MMU: introduce for_each_pte_list_spte Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:01:03 +0800 Message-ID: <4F8E3C7F.5040601@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <4F87FA69.5060106@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4F87FC19.8080404@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120414114422.e3fe6e2abbfdcce61e6f69c8@gmail.com> <4F8B93B9.2030801@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120417234731.a19f270d5701b11ce95d13d4@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Avi Kivity , Marcelo Tosatti , LKML , KVM To: Takuya Yoshikawa Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120417234731.a19f270d5701b11ce95d13d4@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 04/17/2012 10:47 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote: > On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:36:25 +0800 > Xiao Guangrong wrote: > >> I tested it with kernbench, no regression is found. > > Because kernbench is not at all good test for this. > >> It is not a problem since the iter and spte should be in the cache. > > I have checked dirty-log-perf myself with this patch [01-07]. > > GET_DIRTY_LOG for 1GB dirty pages has become more than 15% slower. > Thanks for your test! Unbelievable, i will do more test and check it more carefully. Could you please open your tool, then i can reproduction it and find the real reason? > > Note: if you had checked the worst case latency with this patch series, > you should have noticed this regression by yourself. > > Auto-test and kernbench are not enough to see the effect of this work. > I will check whether your tool is better then kernbench/autotest after review your tool.