qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 :|

  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).