Re: [win-pv-devel] Windows on Xen bad IO performance

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jakub Kulesza [mailto:jakkul@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 28 September 2018 13:51
> To: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: win-pv-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [win-pv-devel] Windows on Xen bad IO performance
> 
> pt., 28 wrz 2018 o 14:00 Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
> napisał(a):
> [cut]
> 
> > > >   Also the master branch should default to a single (or maybe 2?)
> page
> > > ring, even if the backend can do 16 whereas all the 8.2.X drivers will
> use
> > > all 16 pages (which is why you need a heap more grant entries).
> > > >
> > >
> > > can this be tweaked somehow on current 8.2.X drivers? to get a single
> > > page ring? max_ring_page_order on xen_blkback in dom0?
> >
> > Yes, tweaking the mod param in blkback will do the trick.
> >
> > >
> 
> Current debian defaults are:
> log_stats=0
> max_buffer_pages=1024
> max_persistent_grants=1056
> max_queues=4
> max_ring_page_order=4
> 
> what would you tweak? max_queues and max_ring_page_order to 1?

1 will give you a 2 page ring, which should be fine.

> 
> [cut]
> > > >   You could try setting up a logo kit yourself and try testing
> XENVBD to
> > > see if it passes... that would be useful knowledge.
> > >
> > > seems fun. Where can I read on how to set up the logo kit?
> > >
> >
> > See https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/test/hlk/windows-
> hardware-lab-kit
> >
> > > Is there an acceptance testplan that should be run?
> > >
> >
> > I've not use the kit in a while but I believe it should automatically
> select all the tests relevant to the driver you elect to test (which is
> XENVBD in this case).
> 
> I will read and see what I can do about this. I can sacrifice a few
> evenings for sure.
> 

Cool.

> >
> > > Is there a list of issues that you'll want to get fixed for 9.0? Is
> > > Citrix interested right now in getting Windows VMs of their customers
> > > running better :)?
> >
> > Indeed Citrix should be interested, but testing and updating the branded
> drivers has to be prioritized against other things. Whether Citrix wants
> to update branded drivers does not stop me signing and releasing the Xen
> Project drivers though... it just means they won't get as much testing, so
> I'd rather wait... but only if it doesn't take too long.
> 
> ech, priorities, resources, deadlines. I'll hook you up on Linkedin :)
> 

:-)

Cheers,

  Paul

> >
> > > Testing windows VMs on VMware the same way (with
> > > VMware's paravirtual IO) is not stellar anyway, looks crap when you
> > > compare it to virtio on KVM. And 9.0-dev I'd say would be on par with
> > > the big competitor.
> > >
> > > Funny story, I've tried getting virtio qemu devices running within a
> > > XEN VM, but this is not stable enough. I have managed to get the
> > > device show up in Windows, didn't manage to put a filesystem on it
> > > under windows.
> > >
> >
> > A lot of virtio's performance comes from the fact that KVM is a type-2
> and so the backend always has full privilege over the frontend. This means
> that QEMU is set up in such a way that it has all of guest memory mapped
> all the time. Thus virtio has much less overhead, as it does not have to
> care about things like grant tables.
> 
> clear.
> 
> --
> Pozdrawiam
> Jakub Kulesza
_______________________________________________
win-pv-devel mailing list
win-pv-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/win-pv-devel