virtualization.lists.linux-foundation.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com
Cc: Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@lists.osdl.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: system call time increase when turning on CONFIG_PARAVIRT
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 13:54:03 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45E89CFB.4090905@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1172866274.4898.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Tim Chen wrote:
> With CONFIG_PARAVIRT turned on, I've found that time invoking
> system_call jumped up quite a lot.  Using TCP streaming test as a
> workload and running on 32-bit 2.6.20 kernel, system_call goes up from
> 0.00025% all the way to 1.6% in the oprofile data.  There is a drop of
> about 4% in overall throughput for this particular workload. 
>
> With lmbench's null system call test, the call time goes up from 0.10
> usec to 0.225 usec.
>
> I'm testing on dual socket Intel core 2 processor running at 2.67 GHz
> with 4 GB RAM.
[ I assume you're talking about running on native hardware. ]

In the current paravirt changes in the kernel, many of the
paravirtualized operations are implemented as (expensive) indirect calls
via paravirt_ops.  Among the changes in the paravirt patches I posted
yesterday is an enhanced patching mechanism which inlines a lot of the
common operations, and converts the rest into direct calls.

I haven't done any detailed measurements on what effect this will have,
but it does bring the actual executed instruction stream much closer to
the !CONFIG_PARAVIRT case, and so I would hope it would recover most or
all of the performance loss you've noticed.

    J

       reply	other threads:[~2007-03-02 21:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1172866274.4898.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2007-03-02 21:54 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2007-03-02 23:11   ` system call time increase when turning on CONFIG_PARAVIRT Tim Chen
2007-03-03  0:16     ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-03-03  7:00       ` Zachary Amsden
2007-03-08  0:02       ` Tim Chen
2007-03-08  0:55         ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge

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=45E89CFB.4090905@goop.org \
    --to=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.osdl.org \
    /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).