qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Lukáš Doktor" <ldoktor@redhat.com>
To: Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
	Ahmed Karaman <ahmedkhaledkaraman@gmail.com>
Cc: "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
	"QEMU Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	"Richard Henderson" <rth@twiddle.net>
Subject: Re: [REPORT] [GSoC - TCG Continuous Benchmarking] [#2] Dissecting QEMU Into Three Main Parts
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 14:46:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54168dd1-2907-37ef-20d4-9feddf7c7561@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHiYmc7tYYWb6AMQeFtCOQFXWbzB4+jGx1Zia+uvDd8ej+rieg@mail.gmail.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1881 bytes --]

> However, we know that the results for hosts of different architectures
> will be different - we expect that.
> 
> 32-bit Intel host will also most likely produce significantly
> different results than 64-bit Intel hosts. By the way, 64-bit targets
> in QEMU linux-user mode are not supported on 32-bit hosts (although
> nothing stops the user to start corresponding instances of QEMU on a
> 32-bit host, but the results are unpredictable.
> 
> Let's focus now on Intel 64-bit hosts only. Richard, can you perhaps
> enlighten us on whether QEMU (from the point of view of TCG target)
> behaves differently on different Intel 64-bit hosts, and to what
> degree?
> 
> I currently work remotely, but once I am be physically at my office I
> will have a variety of hosts at the company, and would be happy to do
> the comparison between them, wrt what you presented in Report 2.
> 
> In conclusion, I think a basic description of your test bed is missing
> in your reports. And, for final reports (which we call "nightly
> reports") a detailed system description, as Mr Lukas outlined, is,
> also in my opinion, necessary.
> 
> Thanks, Mr. Lukas, for bringing this to our attention!
> 

You're welcome. I'm more on the python side, but as far as I know different cpu models (provided their features are enabled) and especially architectures result in way different code-paths. Imagine an old processor without vector instructions compare to newer ones that can process multiple instructions at once.

As for the reports, I don't think that at this point it would be necessary to focus on anything besides a single cpu model (x86_64 Intel) as there are already many variables. Later someone can follow-up with a cross-arch comparison, if necessary.

Regards,
Lukáš

> Yours,
> Aleksandar
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Best regards,
>> Ahmed Karaman
> 



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2020-06-30 12:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-29 10:25 [REPORT] [GSoC - TCG Continuous Benchmarking] [#2] Dissecting QEMU Into Three Main Parts Ahmed Karaman
2020-06-29 10:40 ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-06-29 14:26   ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-06-29 16:03 ` Alex Bennée
2020-06-29 18:21   ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-06-29 21:16   ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-07-01 13:44   ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-07-01 15:42     ` Alex Bennée
2020-07-01 17:47       ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-07-03 22:46       ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-07-04  8:45         ` Alex Bennée
2020-07-04  9:19           ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-07-04  9:55           ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-07-04 17:10           ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-06-30  4:33 ` Lukáš Doktor
2020-06-30  7:18   ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-06-30  8:58     ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-06-30 12:46       ` Lukáš Doktor [this message]
2020-06-30 19:14         ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-06-30  9:41   ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-06-30 12:58     ` Lukáš Doktor
2020-06-30  5:59 ` 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo)
2020-06-30  7:29   ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-06-30  8:21     ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-06-30  9:52       ` Aleksandar Markovic
2020-06-30 19:02         ` Ahmed Karaman
2020-07-01 14:47 ` Ahmed Karaman

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=54168dd1-2907-37ef-20d4-9feddf7c7561@redhat.com \
    --to=ldoktor@redhat.com \
    --cc=ahmedkhaledkaraman@gmail.com \
    --cc=aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com \
    --cc=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=rth@twiddle.net \
    /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).