[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Segment dirty log for performance

To: David Lively <dlively@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:31:46 +0100
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ben Guthro <bguthro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:32:33 -0700
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
Thread-index: AcgXHCbyZcLWBIMPEdyb3gAX8io7RQ==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Segment dirty log for performance

On 25/10/07 16:23, "David Lively" <dlively@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> No, the performance benefit is not noticeable.  We (Robert Phillips,
> actually) did it to make migrate more reliable.  But relying only on
> order-0 allocations is obviously even better.  I'll take a look at using
> the radix tree as you suggest.

Okay, I see. A patch to use only order-0 allocations would be excellent!

 -- Keir



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

References:
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Segment dirty log for performance
  - From: David Lively

Prev by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Std VGA Performance
Next by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][QEMU] Clear bios framebuffer with minimal writes
Previous by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Segment dirty log for performance
Next by thread: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][QEMU] limit mmio messages
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.