[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] Windows SMP
- To: Venefax <venefax@xxxxxxxxx>
- From: "Dirk Utterback" <dirk.utterback@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:46:54 -0800
- Cc: James Harper <james.harper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:47:29 -0800
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=PGH44wcGoQ0drPOYKRs2xpLIIbVuKiy7gv73LPmZTkRTg8o/eq1n+uYKEQ9fA6vubK 2qWOkxW6QY420eBt/KQZ9qEhCrmKVm4s3edHbXVHCLpT4BdduGJ1iFNugfnaEBNLf41x 7JWxjcm8FU5eBtpxEC1mVTCubloYMn56mWFCk=
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
What is your Xen and Windows version? I have been using CentOS5, and Windows XP as the guest.
It works fine with 2 vcpu for Windows in my setup(apic=1, acpi=1).
Dirk
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Venefax <venefax@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I had to disable both, and PAE. Only APIC=0 would not make any difference. I
will some further testing with Citrix Xenserver 5, using the same virtual
machine and another copy with their vmpd drivers. I bet that there is no
difference in performance. It seems to be a Xen architectural issue. Any
ideas?
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Windows SMP
>
> The problem is not SMP, is ACPI. I installed a non-ACPI Hal, but SMP
> capable, and the performance went right up with 4 virtual processors.
>
> I hope the developers can look into this mess.
>
Can you have ACPI enabled but APIC disabled, or is that not a valid
configuration?
Or the other way around, can you have ACPI disabled but APIC enabled?
Maybe the APIC emulation is causing a performance loss?
James
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
