From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] multifd: Change page count default to 128
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 12:41:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190207124134.GH19438@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877eebg5j4.fsf@trasno.org>
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 01:13:51PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 02:23:28PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
> >> I haven't seend any problem about using 64 or 128. And it make much
> >> less contention on the locks. Just change it.
> >
> > Isn't there a issue with having a fixed page count given the
> > very different default page sizes across architectures ?
> >
> > x86 is 4kb pages, while ppc64 uses 64kb pages IIUC.
> >
> > This would mean current value of 64 pages, would correspond
> > to 1/4 MB on x86, and 4 MB on ppc64. The new value would
> > be 1/2 MB on x86 and 8 MB on ppc64.
>
> I saw no difference (on x86 between 64 and 128 pages). Bigger pages
> means half the contention on the locks and better for compression (see
> next series).
1/4 MB -> 1/2 MB is not all that significant a change, but 1/2 MB
vs 8 MB is very significant.
I wouldn't be surprised if this difference in values results in
rather different performance characteristics for multifd migrate
between x86 and ppc64.
> > Should we instead be measuring this tunable in units that
> > are independant of page size ? eg meansure in KB, with a
> > requirement that the value is a multiple of the page size.
> > Then set the default to 512 KB ?
>
> See next patch, I just dropped the tunable altogether. Libvirt don't
> want to support it (difficult to explain), and in the past you asked me
> to choose a sane value and live with it O:-)
> It was good for testing, though.
Yep, I think its good if QEMU choose a sane value. I'm just wondering
whether the value chosen is actually suitable for non-x86 architectures.
> Once there, is there a good value for a network packet?
I don't have any particular suggestion here. Probably would have to
look at real performance measurements of migration vs guest workload
to understand if we've got a good size.
> I put it in pages because it facilitates the coding, but doing a:
> CONSTANT/qemu_target_page_size() is not going to complicate anything
> either.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-07 12:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-06 13:23 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] migration: Make multifd not experimental Juan Quintela
2019-02-06 13:23 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] multifd: Change page count default to 128 Juan Quintela
2019-02-07 11:33 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-02-07 12:13 ` Juan Quintela
2019-02-07 12:13 ` Juan Quintela
2019-02-07 12:41 ` Daniel P. Berrangé [this message]
2019-02-06 13:23 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/4] multifd: Drop x-multifd-page-count parameter Juan Quintela
2019-02-06 14:20 ` Laurent Vivier
2019-02-06 17:58 ` Juan Quintela
2019-02-06 19:00 ` Laurent Vivier
2019-02-07 12:15 ` Juan Quintela
2019-02-07 12:33 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-02-12 9:34 ` Juan Quintela
2019-02-12 10:29 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-02-06 13:23 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] multifd: Drop x- Juan Quintela
2019-02-07 11:23 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-02-06 13:23 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/4] tests: Add migration multifd test Juan Quintela
2019-02-06 15:49 ` Thomas Huth
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=20190207124134.GH19438@redhat.com \
--to=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@redhat.com \
--cc=thuth@redhat.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).