From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57544)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <hozer@hozed.org>) id 1T4EeU-0006K5-SA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:23:36 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <hozer@hozed.org>) id 1T4EeT-0004vY-Pi
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:23:34 -0400
Received: from [74.115.254.7] (port=41578 helo=us.grid.coop)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <hozer@hozed.org>) id 1T4EeT-0004rS-Kf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:23:33 -0400
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:22:58 -0500
From: Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed.org>
Message-ID: <20120822172258.GF7722@us.grid.coop>
References: <20120817123642.GA16736@alpha.arachsys.com>
	<5030F273.5080706@redhat.com>
	<20120820135656.GA16676@alpha.arachsys.com>
	<50334E13.8020100@redhat.com>
	<20120821152107.GA16363@alpha.arachsys.com>
	<5034A18B.5040408@redhat.com>
	<20120822124032.GA12647@alpha.arachsys.com>
	<5034D437.8070106@redhat.com>
	<20120822144150.GA1400@alpha.arachsys.com>
	<5034F24D.1090105@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5034F24D.1090105@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Windows slow boot: contractor wanted
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Richard Davies <richard.davies@elastichosts.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

> > I've now triggered a very slow boot at 3x 36GB 8-core VMs on a 128GB host
> > (i.e. 108GB on a 128GB host).
> > 
> > It has the same profile with _raw_spin_lock_irqsave and
> > isolate_freepages_block at the top.
> 
> Then it's still memory starved.
> 
> Please provide /proc/zoneinfo while this is happening.

Is there a way to capture/reproduce this 'slow boot' behavior with
a simple regression test? I'd like to know if it happens on a
single-physical CPU socket machine, or just on dual-sockets.

I'm also observing an interesting phenomenon here.. Kernel development
can move so fast as to make regression testing pointless. ;)