qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: OHMURA Kei <ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	mtosatti@redhat.com,
	Yoshiaki Tamura <tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
	"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	drepper@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v2] qemu-kvm: Speed up of the dirty-bitmap-traveling
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:57:47 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B7CD6DB.60908@lab.ntt.co.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <FE3E6123-9040-40E4-8D38-63E1532B9843@suse.de>

>>>>> "We think"? I mean - yes, I think so too. But have you actually measured it?
>>>>> How much improvement are we talking here?
>>>>> Is it still faster when a bswap is involved?
>>>> Thanks for pointing out.
>>>> I will post the data for x86 later.
>>>> However, I don't have a test environment to check the impact of bswap.
>>>> Would you please measure the run time between the following section if possible?
>>> It'd make more sense to have a real stand alone test program, no?
>>> I can try to write one today, but I have some really nasty important bugs to fix first.
>>
>> OK.  I will prepare a test code with sample data.  Since I found a ppc machine around, I will run the code and post the results of
>> x86 and ppc.
>>
>>
>> By the way, the following data is a result of x86 measured in QEMU/KVM.  
>> This data shows, how many times the function is called (#called), runtime of original function(orig.), runtime of this patch(patch), speedup ratio (ratio).
> 
> That does indeed look promising!
> 
> Thanks for doing this micro-benchmark. I just want to be 100% sure that it doesn't affect performance for big endian badly.


I measured runtime of the test code with sample data.  My test environment 
and results are described below.

x86 Test Environment:
CPU: 4x Intel Xeon Quad Core 2.66GHz
Mem size: 6GB

ppc Test Environment:
CPU: 2x Dual Core PPC970MP
Mem size: 2GB

The sample data of dirty bitmap was produced by QEMU/KVM while the guest OS
was live migrating.  To measure the runtime I copied cpu_get_real_ticks() of
QEMU to my test program.


Experimental results:
Test1: Guest OS read 3GB file, which is bigger than memory. 
       orig.(msec)    patch(msec)    ratio
x86    0.3            0.1            6.4 
ppc    7.9            2.7            3.0 

Test2: Guest OS read/write 3GB file, which is bigger than memory. 
       orig.(msec)    patch(msec)    ratio
x86    12.0           3.2            3.7 
ppc    251.1          123            2.0 


I also measured the runtime of bswap itself on ppc, and I found it was only 
just 0.3% ~ 0.7 % of the runtime described above. 

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-18  5:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-10 10:52 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] qemu-kvm: Speed up of the dirty-bitmap-traveling OHMURA Kei
2010-02-10 13:10 ` [Qemu-devel] " Ulrich Drepper
2010-02-10 13:20 ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-10 15:54   ` Anthony Liguori
2010-02-10 15:57     ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-10 16:00     ` Alexander Graf
2010-02-10 16:35       ` Anthony Liguori
2010-02-10 16:43         ` Alexander Graf
2010-02-10 16:46           ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-10 16:47             ` Alexander Graf
2010-02-10 16:52               ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-10 16:54                 ` Alexander Graf
2010-02-10 16:43         ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-10 15:55   ` Anthony Liguori
2010-02-12  2:03     ` OHMURA Kei
2010-02-14 12:34       ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-15  6:12         ` OHMURA Kei
2010-02-15  8:24           ` Alexander Graf
2010-02-16 11:16             ` OHMURA Kei
2010-02-16 11:18               ` Alexander Graf
2010-02-17  9:42                 ` OHMURA Kei
2010-02-17  9:46                   ` Alexander Graf
2010-02-18  5:57                     ` OHMURA Kei [this message]
2010-02-18 10:30                       ` Alexander Graf
2010-02-17  9:47                   ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-17  9:49                     ` Alexander Graf

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=4B7CD6DB.60908@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    --to=ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    --cc=agraf@suse.de \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=drepper@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    /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).