Re: [Xen-devel] [libvirt test] 58119: regressions - FAIL

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Anthony PERARD writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [libvirt test] 58119: regressions - 
FAIL"):
> FYI, I have looked at how long it takes for QEMU to start, from libxl point
> of view, and from strace point of view.
> 
> For libxl, I have look at the time difference between a call to
> libxl__ev_xswatch_register('device-model/$domid/path') and
> libxl__qmp_initialize():
> cat deltatime | sort | uniq -c
>   2754 0:00:00
>   1309 0:00:01
>     12 0:00:02
>      8 0:00:03
>      5 0:00:04
>      1 0:00:05
>      4 0:00:06
>      7 0:00:07
>      6 0:00:08
>      1 0:00:09
>      2 0:00:10
>     16 timeout: 0:00:10

Is this information from merlot ?

> >From straces, it is the time between the execve() call and when QEMU
> respond to a QMP connection. The average is 0.316729, and the standard
> deviation is 0.460369 (The average and std deviation does not take into
> account the QEMUs that timed out).  But, out of the 3386 QEMU startup,
> there are 26 run that took between 2s and 10s, and there are 14
> more qemu run that have timed out.
> 
> I'm going to send a patch to ask to increase the timeout.

I think you have not explained why these long startup times are to be
expected.  If they are _not_ expected, we should not be covering up
for them by increasing the timeout.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel