From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41292)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1T3l4o-0002bc-Nt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 05:48:47 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1T3l4n-0007V9-OO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 05:48:46 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9853)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1T3l4n-0007Uz-Bd
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 05:48:45 -0400
Message-ID: <50334E13.8020100@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 12:00:03 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20120816104727.GA17166@alpha.arachsys.com>
	<502CDC0D.9080004@redhat.com>
	<20120817123642.GA16736@alpha.arachsys.com>
	<5030F273.5080706@redhat.com>
	<20120820135656.GA16676@alpha.arachsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120820135656.GA16676@alpha.arachsys.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Richard Davies <richard@arachsys.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org

On 08/20/2012 04:56 PM, Richard Davies wrote:

> We're running host kernel 3.5.1 and qemu-kvm 1.1.1.
> 
> I hadn't though about it, but I agree this is related to cpu overcommit. The
> slow boots are intermittent (and infrequent) with cpu overcommit whereas I
> don't think it occurs without cpu overcommit.
> 
> In addition, if there is a slow boot ongoing, and you kill some other VMs to
> reduce cpu overcommit then this will sometimes speed it up.
> 
> I guess the question is why even with overcommit most boots are fine, but
> some small fraction then go slow?

Could be a bug.  The scheduler and the spin-loop handling code fight
each other instead of working well.

Please provide snapshots of 'perf top' while a slow boot is in progress.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function