[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Why is 'emulate' as good as writable PT's?
Ian Pratt wrote: Yes, we definitely have a problem here. Tons of flushes with modified=1, and lots with <=10. The three benchmarks all seem to hit the same areas. Here is the output from running SDET, with snippets from System.map mixed in:Could there be situations were we are inadvertently triggering a writable page table, where we should just be doing aupdate_va_mapping()? Almost certainly. Singleton (or small batch) updates should not be using writeable pagetables, and should use update_va_mapping (or mmu_update if the VA isn't known or may not be mapped). ~18 months ago Rolf wrote and checked in profile code to collect a histogram of the number of entries found to be modified when writeable pagetables are flushed. At the time there was a big spike at '1' which was fixed, but with allthe various linux version upgrades it likely needs revisiting.The profile code also records the EIP that caused the writeable pagetables operation, so if you print out the value a few times you'll quickly find the culprit. Thanks, Ian Out of a total of 19601 writable PT updates: c01522b0 <=1 40 <=10 0 <=50 0 <=100 0 <=512 0 -------- c0151e90 T sys_mprotect c01524d3 t .text.lock.mprotect c014ed77 <=1 3418 <=10 4853 <=50 1674 <=100 70 <=512 0 -------- c014e84e T copy_page_range c014efc6 T free_pgtables c01522ab <=1 3728 <=10 0 <=50 0 <=100 0 <=512 0 -------- c0151e90 T sys_mprotect c01524d3 t .text.lock.mprotect c014b809 <=1 3752 <=10 1654 <=50 302 <=100 10 <=512 3 -------- c014b300 T unmap_vmas c014b9ba T zap_page_range c014b80b <=1 32 <=10 30 <=50 30 <=100 1 <=512 0 -------- c014b300 T unmap_vmas c014b9ba T zap_page_range -Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |