Re: [PATCH RFC V8 0/17] Paravirtualized ticket spinlocks

[Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 05/07/2012 02:02 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/07/2012 11:29 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > This is looking pretty good and complete now - any objections
> > from anyone to trying this out in a separate x86 topic tree?
>
> No objections, instead an
>
> Acked-by: Avi Kivity<avi@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thank you.

Here is a benchmark result with the patches.

3 guests with 8VCPU, 8GB RAM, 1 used for kernbench
(kernbench -f -H -M -o 20) other for cpuhog (shell script while
true with an instruction)

unpinned scenario
1x: no hogs
2x: 8hogs in one guest
3x: 8hogs each in two guest

BASE: 3.4-rc4 vanilla with CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCK=n
BASE+patch: 3.4-rc4 + debugfs + pv patches with CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCK=y

Machine : IBM xSeries with Intel(R) Xeon(R) x5570 2.93GHz CPU (Non PLE) 
with 8 core , 64GB RAM

(Less is better. Below is time elapsed in sec for x86_64_defconfig (3+3 
runs)).

		 BASE                    BASE+patch            %improvement
		 mean (sd)               mean (sd)
case 1x:	 66.0566 (74.0304) 	 61.3233 (68.8299) 	7.16552
case 2x:	 1253.2 (1795.74) 	 131.606 (137.358) 	89.4984
case 3x:	 3431.04 (5297.26) 	 134.964 (149.861) 	96.0664


Will be working on further analysis with other benchmarks 
(pgbench/sysbench/ebizzy...) and further optimization.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html