Re: [Xen-devel] [ARM] Native application design and discussion (I hope)

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>]

On 27/04/17 18:26, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
> Hi Julien,
Hi Volodymyr,

> I'm back with profiler results.
>
> > > Oh, yes. Sorry I forgot this thread. Continuing on that, you said that "Now
> > > profiler shows that hypervisor spends time in spinlocks and p2m code."
> > >
> > > Could you expand here? How the EL0 app will spend time in p2m code?
> > I don't quite remember. It was somewhere around p2m save/restore
> > context functions.
> > I'll try to restore that setup and will provide more details.
> So, there are top 5 functions:
>
> p2m_restore_state - 10.6%
This is with your el0_app branch? Or did you make some changes?

For instance, the p2m_restore_state has been reworked for Xen 4.9 and 
some of the isb() could be dropped.
> spin_lock - 8.4%
> spin_unlock_irqrestore - 6%
I am a bit confused on what you are profiling. Are you only profiling 
context save/restore? Or do you also profile the rest of the hypervisor?
E.g, how many time spin_*lock are called... That would help to know if 
the problem is because of the number of locks taken or potential 
optimization that we didn't implement.
> ctxt_switch_to_partial - 5.7%
> gicv2_hcr_status - 4.6%
Cheers,

> per-source-file statistics:
>
> spinlock.c - 22%
> entry.S - 15%
> arm/domain.c - 11.6%
--
Julien Grall

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