[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/8] Various VPMU patches
On 04/10/2013 02:49 PM, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote: Boris,I am trying the patch set on the trinity and ran into the following issue:root@sos-dev02:/sandbox/xen/xen-git-boris# xl create /sandbox/vm-images/xen-configs/ubuntu-12.10_dom.hvmParsing config from /sandbox/vm-images/xen-configs/ubuntu-12.10_dom.hvm libxl: error: libxl_create.c:416:libxl__domain_make: domain creation faillibxl: error: libxl_create.c:644:initiate_domain_create: cannot make domain: -3libxl: error: libxl.c:1377:libxl__destroy_domid: non-existant domain -1libxl: error: libxl.c:1341:domain_destroy_callback: unable to destroy guest with domid 4294967295 libxl: error: libxl_create.c:1208:domcreate_destruction_cb: unable to destroy domain 4294967295 following failed creationroot@sos-dev02:/sandbox/xen/xen-git-boris# The same hvm config file starts up fine on older hypervisor. Any clues? This is failure during domain creation and the patchset is not touching any of that code. Is there anything in xl dmesg or /var/log/xen? -boris Suravee On 4/9/2013 12:26 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:Here is a set of VPMU changes that I thought might be useful. The first two patches are to avoid VMEXITs on certain MSR accesses. This is already part of VMX so I added similar SVM code The third patch should address the problem that Suravee mentioned on thelist a few weeks ago (http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2013-03/msg00087.html).It's a slightly different solution then what he suggested. 4th patch stops counters on AMD when VCPU is de-scheduled 5th is trivial Haswell support (new model number) 6th patch is trying to factor out common code from VMX and SVM.7th is lazy VPMU save/restore. It is optimized for the case when CPUs are not over-subscribed and VCPU stays on the same processor most of the time.It is more beneficial on Intel processors because HW will keep track ofguest/host global control register in VMCS and tehrefore we don't need toexplicitly stop the counters. On AMD we do need to do this and so while there is improvement, it is not as pronounced.Here are some numbers that I managed to collect while running guests with oprofile. This is number of executed instructions in vpmu_save/vpmu_load.Eager VPMU Lazy VPMU Save Restore Save Restore Intel 181 225 46 50 AMD 132 104 80 102When processors are oversubscribed, lazy restore may take about 2.5 timesas many instructions as in the dedicated case if new VCPU jumps onto the processor (which doesn't happen on every context switch). -boris Boris Ostrovsky (8): x86/AMD: Allow more fine-grained control of VMCB MSR Permission Map x86/AMD: Do not intercept access to performance counters MSRs x86/AMD: Read VPMU MSRs from context when it is not loaded into HW x86/AMD: Stop counters on VPMU save x86/VPMU: Add Haswell support x86/VPMU: Factor out VPMU common code x86/VPMU: Save/restore VPMU only when necessary x86/AMD: Clean up context_update() in AMD VPMU code xen/arch/x86/domain.c | 14 ++- xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/svm.c | 19 ++--xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/vpmu.c | 188 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c | 2 - xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vpmu_core2.c | 48 ++++---- xen/arch/x86/hvm/vpmu.c | 114 +++++++++++++++++-- xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/svm/vmcb.h | 8 +- xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vmx/vpmu_core2.h | 1 - xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vpmu.h | 6 +- 9 files changed, 296 insertions(+), 104 deletions(-) _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |