qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: "Zhanghaoyu (A)" <haoyu.zhang@huawei.com>
Cc: "Huangweidong (C)" <weidong.huang@huawei.com>,
	KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
	Luonengjun <luonengjun@huawei.com>,
	"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] question about VM kernel parameter idle=<poll/mwait/halt/nomwait>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 09:01:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131121070139.GL19005@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D3E216785288A145B7BC975F83A2ED10448A949B@SZXEMA510-MBS.china.huawei.com>

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 03:45:28AM +0000, Zhanghaoyu (A) wrote:
> Hi, all
> 
> What's the difference of the linux guest kernel parameter idle=<poll/mwait/halt/nomwait>, especially in performance?
> 
> Taking the performance into account, which one is best?
> 
> In my opinion, if the number of all VMs' vcpus is far more than that of pcpus, e.g. SPECVirt test, idle=halt is better for server's total throughput,
> otherwise, e.g. in some CT scenario, the number of total vcpus is not greater than that of pcpus, idle=poll is better for server's total throughput,
> because of less latency and VMEXIT.

Makes sense overall.

> linux-3.9 and above, idle=mwait is not recommended.
> 
> Thanks,
> Zhang Haoyu

Does it actually have effect? I didn't think it would.

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-21  6:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-21  3:45 [Qemu-devel] question about VM kernel parameter idle=<poll/mwait/halt/nomwait> Zhanghaoyu (A)
2013-11-21  7:01 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2013-11-21  7:22   ` Gleb Natapov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20131121070139.GL19005@redhat.com \
    --to=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=haoyu.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luonengjun@huawei.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=weidong.huang@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).