[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC V10 0/18] Paravirtualized ticket spinlocks
- To: Andrew Jones <drjones@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 14:03:40 +0530
- Cc: jeremy@xxxxxxxx, gregkh@xxxxxxx, gleb@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, agraf@xxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, habanero@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx, ouyang@xxxxxxxxxxx, avi.kivity@xxxxxxxxx, tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, chegu_vinod@xxxxxx, mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, srivatsa.vaddagiri@xxxxxxxxx, attilio.rao@xxxxxxxxxx, pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, stephan.diestelhorst@xxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 08:30:21 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On 06/24/2013 06:47 PM, Andrew Jones wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 06:10:14PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
Results:
=======
base = 3.10-rc2 kernel
patched = base + this series
The test was on 32 core (model: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X7560) HT disabled
with 32 KVM guest vcpu 8GB RAM.
Have you ever tried to get results with HT enabled?
+-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
ebizzy (records/sec) higher is better
+-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
base stdev patched stdev %improvement
+-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
1x 5574.9000 237.4997 5618.0000 94.0366 0.77311
2x 2741.5000 561.3090 3332.0000 102.4738 21.53930
3x 2146.2500 216.7718 2302.3333 76.3870 7.27237
4x 1663.0000 141.9235 1753.7500 83.5220 5.45701
+-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
This looks good. Are your ebizzy results consistent run to run
though?
+-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
dbench (Throughput) higher is better
+-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
base stdev patched stdev %improvement
+-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
1x 14111.5600 754.4525 14645.9900 114.3087 3.78718
2x 2481.6270 71.2665 2667.1280 73.8193 7.47498
3x 1510.2483 31.8634 1503.8792 36.0777 -0.42173
4x 1029.4875 16.9166 1039.7069 43.8840 0.99267
+-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
Hmm, I wonder what 2.5x looks like. Also, the 3% improvement with
no overcommit is interesting. What's happening there? It makes
me wonder what < 1x looks like.
Hi Andrew,
I tried 2.5x case sort where I used 3 guests with 27 vcpu each on 32
core (HT disabled machine) and here is the output. almost no gain there.
throughput avg stdev
base: 1768.7458 MB/sec 54.044221
patched: 1772.5617 MB/sec 41.227689
gain %0.226
I am yet to try HT enabled cases that would give 0.5x to 2x performance
results.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
