From: Andreas Kinzler <ml-xen-devel@hfp.de>
To: George Dunlap <dunlapg@umich.edu>
Cc: David Vrabel <dvrabel@cantab.net>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xensource.com,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: Poor performance with Linux 3.x as dom0
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 12:46:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FA26220.40205@hfp.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFLBxZZbgx=kGBQm-y682kmtW5ytOSeac4m_AedGU-a8JLUfeg@mail.gmail.com>
On 03.05.2012 10:32, George Dunlap wrote:
>>> Can you apply 7eb7ce4d2e8991aff4ecb71a81949a907ca755ac "xen: correctly
>>> check for pending events when restoring irq flags"[1] and see how much
>>> it helps?
>> There is some minor improvement - but it is still far away from xenified
>> 2.6.34.10.
> Just FYI, the reason Ian suggested making the same comparison for
> native is that the performance of linux overall on bare-metal has also
> suffered since 2.6.34. It's likely that a non-trivial amount of the
> performance regression is due to moving from 2.6.34 to 3.{2,3}, over
> and above whatever regressions may have happened when moving from
> xenified to pvops.
I took his suggestion serious - and actually I had performed these tests
(see my other post). Unfortunately, the minor loss on bare-metal and the
huge loss on xenified 2.6.34 vs pvops 3.x show that the problem is
clearly with the Xen changes and not the bare-metal changes.
Regards Andreas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-03 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-02 13:11 Poor performance with Linux 3.x as dom0 Andreas Kinzler
2012-05-02 13:30 ` David Vrabel
2012-05-02 17:01 ` Andreas Kinzler
2012-05-03 8:32 ` George Dunlap
2012-05-03 10:46 ` Andreas Kinzler [this message]
2012-05-02 13:31 ` Ian Campbell
2012-05-03 10:43 ` Andreas Kinzler
2012-05-03 10:51 ` Ian Campbell
2012-05-07 19:48 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-05-18 16:39 ` Andreas Kinzler
2012-05-03 11:33 ` Stefano Stabellini
2012-05-03 11:31 ` Stefano Stabellini
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=4FA26220.40205@hfp.de \
--to=ml-xen-devel@hfp.de \
--cc=dunlapg@umich.edu \
--cc=dvrabel@cantab.net \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/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).