[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] More network tests with xenoprofile this time
On Wednesday 01 June 2005 15:21, Andrew Theurer wrote: > On Wednesday 01 June 2005 15:03, Jon Mason wrote: > > On Tuesday 31 May 2005 05:48 pm, Ian Pratt wrote: > > > > I have cpu util from polling xc_domain_get_cpu_usage() for > > > > both domains, which is (an exerpt from the whole run, in 3 > > > > second intervals): > > > > > > > > cpu0: [100.4] d0-0[100.4] > > > > cpu2: [045.1] d1-0[045.1] > > > > > > OK, so you're confident idle time would be reported OK if there > > > was any. > > > > > > > > Is the Ethernet NIC sharing an interrupt with the USB > > > > > > > > controller per > > > > > > > > > chance? > > > > > > > > Not as far as I can tell: > > > > > > > > CPU0 > > > > 11: 6764395 Phys-irq ohci_hcd > > > > 24: 6037311 Phys-irq eth0 > > > > 260: 1688517 Dynamic-irq vif1.0 > > > > > > Anyone care to suggest hy ohci_hcd is taking so many interrupts? > > > Looks very fishy to me. I take it you're not using a USB Ethernet > > > NIC? :-) > > > > The bladecenters have a shared USB connected to all the blades. I > > would imagine it is the keyboard/mouse or USB CDROM connected to > > this bus that is generating all of these interrupts. > > > > > What happens if you boot 'nousb' ? > > > > This shouldn't hurt anything, unless Andrew needs access to kdb or > > cdrom. > > This is on a x336 system, P4 Xeon, not much USB really needed. I did > not see any difference in performace or the profile with nousb. > > I also tried disbaling the locks in find_domain_by_id and saw no > difference. I'm curious to see how things differ with dom0 on CPU-0 > HT-0 and dom1 on CPU-0 HT-1. I will probably try that next. > > FWIW, baremetal linux used about 33% of one cpu to drive the same > throughput. int's/sec was 41k/sec for baremetal vs 59k/sec for dom0. > I don't have the breakdown of int/sec per interrupt number yet. Wanted to follow up, one correction, I did not have usb disabled properly, and with properly removing usb, there is a slight reduction in irq handling overhead as a result: 542129 6.2205 xen-unstable-syms mask_and_ack_level_ioapic_irq 506060 5.8067 xen-unstable-syms end_level_ioapic_irq 475786 5.4593 vmlinux-2.6.11-xen0-up net_tx_action 376309 4.3179 vmlinux-2.6.11-xen0-up tg3_interrupt 263008 3.0178 xen-unstable-syms find_domain_by_id 239789 2.7514 xen-unstable-syms hypercall 224547 2.5765 vmlinux-2.6.11-xen0-up nf_iterate ...vs about 8-9% each for the top two functions before. The interrupt rate for the tg3 adapter is very high still, about 24k/sec. At that rate it does not appear to have any interrupt coalescing going on, so I am going to look into that. -Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |