From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80C49D3B7F6 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2025 21:06:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vT4uh-0007vV-Rc; Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:06:27 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vT4ug-0007vM-Ro for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:06:26 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vT4uf-0006Bz-Dq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:06:26 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1765314383; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bPVUc1LTF2C9DDm8g5/DYniKgjwK96QAOU5r+Fzi3Qo=; b=VVuFeDPriC5dOdJA+uHR32zApS7KfjXS/DqTxR45IUtG5Lmmff9pjY40jDyJjQrkUxBM6g siaO3VUp5Qi2s38mecqhx3+RiqaRra07iKitcBQrUcgDc6Z1F3uBb/epNrXkCljRjEtOOi T6NFixi+Z4qgajkO69UzElZ5XkGCh0s= Received: from mail-qk1-f200.google.com (mail-qk1-f200.google.com [209.85.222.200]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-189-CNT-fAw3PZSzExavERwlPQ-1; Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:06:22 -0500 X-MC-Unique: CNT-fAw3PZSzExavERwlPQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: CNT-fAw3PZSzExavERwlPQ_1765314382 Received: by mail-qk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-8b2194e266aso1173707885a.3 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2025 13:06:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=google; t=1765314382; x=1765919182; darn=nongnu.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=bPVUc1LTF2C9DDm8g5/DYniKgjwK96QAOU5r+Fzi3Qo=; b=GcTwRgxBVVodSMxmnnDr9sQrx0tqyLhE+aWU/39oo+f/l1SjdkefKPfrT3GC13x/4r bxmpQPXHFZ/fx91L8MkMh6+Kh7piNevEiB3fc6o5gF8/UGtllcemDtok3DwlI8ov3bu8 8QRbmDF5IE2eWPcOE55V3bDaDJcvkj6LlBy7M3tfANY/38W2JGUsjbyfXzk4Uvj2z3Ki SiznDt13+wfhbAi/YeJmG1CpYoVbzI4VwOYqSn6HwF+OM/akO1TX5hVYYrHuqOUDiyol ZZgVoXMZ+vwBjI2OybjTkr96bzaeOb5A1+sq+zSPbijEbod81wzJ5lVuDhOmY/lx+I4p ojOQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1765314382; x=1765919182; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=bPVUc1LTF2C9DDm8g5/DYniKgjwK96QAOU5r+Fzi3Qo=; b=f7/STyfTMciGjqbmmWmBWsGrGNNQ8cVaHD4bSIsHsXk4nziZw3C8tPwK7MzPbFsOy7 kZSxjS0dUMXObVP0Q+RpebdKex7wtr3pUkG4/tGC/fuSFexTkGxPr5tYEbu4Rns1hW7+ 5BYw3h6EzlODyaWxQrhRczIkX7gNmPQsoNkW9Qbb5SNK/5lZ2FHzVY9flWt89ykbv7+M XmUZ7fFjHQjiWUhuNfvIdWbRNge0b+sCXh4WlSj0lRKzkekwf8F7SburinzK7WQFmfkJ nYRso9sl5e8gkKYQqRuUA6kQ1TTgFujo/mEVIECTBBZu3PgD1oIHGZn3NK0RVatMrOkJ qsDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwA6caPfziB7HprEM9zRkwyPAbUrvP55r4oXwqNVGJcq4nPE16q vNb30rb1gKf10PiLpUrBwrWTTRdzSM39391ls/DhqqzJ+Y4uhhedXwUqmhvYyjxFAFotHkzgX1q YewoC3rRJgqqK+RmAiNSLivjuQ8mR8bFrog+7NvSTtl1SgNKGjW92zf/k X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsarzRmhrzc9sXO1oYDdwl3Cv3YSa8lKJHfFOjAddBBJ7UTDjj17DZfh4UZU7d 386GeFKTKLU/AGKWwvWS76zfLqW3n4Z73ybupTxWl57HFjoGkqcGgpQ3YDGu6eaYmJW99WmuLL5 zuKm8ePPZMt30bTz4ahsnqlg3TMpU4AfgpNNK++w3Q48senv9Sp1kTwkcGeBZuUBxGwPuPxfuoe ajvqRMAkf97FHnzoQvHJyq2HlnXCiSTt043V6t8i7Wyd2r08PoLq50L93E6Q+kDe2YJ5mbHp7eW cnzMVVT4WHi/uuaFphL1jC4UAz1N6gQ6p7QirXat2S/LWQiuTuefXYpPoYidL4tGaAw3LHMYPDo WufE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:28c4:b0:8b2:f182:6945 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-8ba3a45824bmr52528185a.58.1765314381789; Tue, 09 Dec 2025 13:06:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGP4P3Dcl+UqaAqsSmBIFLfANfIi2IFBN+q75MQ/yPfYPLR7YVFquDMGkAvTDXIPsVyj7+I6g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:28c4:b0:8b2:f182:6945 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-8ba3a45824bmr52524185a.58.1765314381331; Tue, 09 Dec 2025 13:06:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from x1.local ([142.188.210.156]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-88827f34168sm138432316d6.1.2025.12.09.13.06.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 09 Dec 2025 13:06:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 16:06:18 -0500 From: Peter Xu To: Chuang Xu Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mst@redhat.com, sgarzare@redhat.com, richard.henderson@linaro.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, david@kernel.org, philmd@linaro.org, farosas@suse.de Subject: Re: [RFC v1 0/2] migration: reduce bitmap sync time and make dirty pages converge much more easily Message-ID: References: <20251208120952.37563-1-xuchuangxclwt@bytedance.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20251208120952.37563-1-xuchuangxclwt@bytedance.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=peterx@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Mon, Dec 08, 2025 at 08:09:50PM +0800, Chuang Xu wrote: > For a 64C256G vm with 8 vhost-user-net(32 queue per nic) and 16 vhost-user-blk(4 queue per blk), > the sync time is as high as 250ms, while after applying this patch, the sync time is only 10ms. This is definitely an improvement. Could I request for a split of perf results? As the two patches do totally different things, so I think it would make sense to know which provided how much benefits. -- Peter Xu