RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

[Suzanne McIntosh <skranjac@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks so much - this is very helpful.
For comparison purposes, it would be
great to know the message size. Also wondering if doms were pinned?

Regards, Sue

_______________________________________________________________
Suzanne McIntosh
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Secure Systems and Services

"Santos, Jose Renato G" <joserenato.santos@xxxxxx>
Sent by: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

03/26/2007 06:25 PM

To	Suzanne McIntosh/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc	Xen Development Mailing List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject	RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Suzanne
McIntosh
                
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:48 PM
                
To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                
Cc: Suzanne McIntosh
                
Subject: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs.
copy
                
                

                
Hi, 
                
I am looking for performance numbers comparing the network
driver flip vs. copy feature 
                
on a 32-bit machine. Could not locate this info in Xen archives.
Would appreciate any help. 
                
                
Thanks, Sue 
                
_______________________________________________________________
                
Suzanne McIntosh 
                
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
                
Secure Systems and Services 
                

Here is some old data that I have for comparing page flip with copy.
Note that this for Xen unstable  as of October 3, 2006.
I don't more recent data, but I believe the relative performance should
not have changed much, although the absolute numbers may be different
now.

I hope this helps

Renato

> Here are the results comparing copy and page flip.
> These results were using netperf TCP_STREAM test which use large size
> packets.
> I run experiments for receiving and transmiting to from/to a external
> client.
> The results show that copying use less cycles than page flip but dom0
> has higher utilization (due to the copy).
> This caused dom0 cpu to saturate and reduced the throuhgput slightly
in
> my machine. I have a 4way Intel Xeon 2.8Ghz with 4GB of RAM (each
domain
> is using 512 MB of RAM).
> Copy is also better for the transmit experiment since the overhead
for

> processing ACKs is reduced.
> 
> I will work on the transmit side optimizations starting tomorrow.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Renato
> 
> =======================================================
> receive:
> ------------------------------------------------------_
>      |        |      
             | cycles/packet  
 |
>      |  Rate  |  CPU utilization  
|  (thousands)     |
>      |  Mb/s  | dom0  dom1   tot
  | dom0  dom1  tot  |
> -------------------------------------------------------
> flip | 941.34 | 84.2% 76.3% 160.4% | 30.1  27.2  57.3 |
> copy | 907.71 | 99.7% 45.2% 144.9% | 36.9  16.7  53.6 |
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> transmit:
> ------------------------------------
>      |        |      
             |
>      |  Rate  |  CPU utilization  
|
>      |  Mb/s  | dom0  dom1   tot
  |
> ------------------------------------
> flip | 941.31 | 49.6% 43.9%  93.5% |
> copy | 941.30 | 45.2% 34.5%  79.7% |
> ------------------------------------

________________________________

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel