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

RE: [Xen-devel][PATCH]Provide 3 times continously writes check and unshadow the guest page

  • To: "Tim Deegan" <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:09:19 +0800
  • Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:10:04 -0800
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: Achhk5xz8DGQBdimQxy4w9ow4rOKRwAhqKEg
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel][PATCH]Provide 3 times continously writes check and unshadow the guest page

We have tried 4 other than 3 before just for Kernel build test, and we just 
noticed it will not improve the kernel build for ia32e guest so much. But at 
that time we didn't test for other benchmark. So we will have another try to 
see whether high numbers will be helpful. Thanks.


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tim Deegan [mailto:Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: 2008年1月28日 17:49
>To: Xin, Xiaohui
>Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH]Provide 3 times continously writes check and
>unshadow the guest page
>At 09:49 +0000 on 24 Jan (1201168161), Tim Deegan wrote:
>> The measurements you gave look like it fixes
>> one particularly bad case very well, but makes overall performance
>> worse.  In that case, I'm wondering whether there might be a better way
>> of fixing the network-buffer issue without degrading general
>> performance.
>What's the trade-off if you use numbers other than three in this
>heuristic?  Does a higher number still detetct data pages without
>harming the general performance so much?
>Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Principal Software Engineer, Citrix Systems (R&D) Ltd.
>[Company #02300071, SL9 0DZ, UK.]

Xen-devel mailing list



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