RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [12/4rd week]

["Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>]

I suspect that this is the same problem as reported here:

http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-ia64-devel/2005-12/msg00185.html 

This is the first report on domU. I've only observed it on dom0.
Because it seems random, it may be very difficult to track
down.

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
> Of yo.fujita
> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 3:32 AM
> To: 'yo.fujita'; xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [12/4rd week]
> 
> Hi, all
> 
> I had put out the following mail before. 
> And, it was pointed out that there was an unexpected value in the 
> bench result of DomU.
> Thanks, Eddie.
> 
> Please look at the following value.
> dom0:
>               C Compiler Throughput                       702.0 lpm
> (60 secs, 3 samples)
> domU:
>               C Compiler Throughput                     64655.7 lpm
> (62 secs, 2 samples)
> 
> dom0:
>               Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)               2276.3 lpm
> (60 secs, 3 samples)
> domU:
>               Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)             473647.0 lpm
> (61 secs, 2 samples)
> 
> The value of dom0 and domU is greatly different.
> I investigated this phenomenon.
> As for the understood thing, domU uncommonly abort in gcc.
> Please look at cc_loop.txt of the attached file.
> This is a result of loop only C compile of unixbench.
> When the result is Bad wait status:0xb or 0x100, the value will become
> abnormal.
> As for "Shell Scripts", it might be similar.
> the next benchmark will be executed with changeset8474.
> 
> Thanks,
> Fujita
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of yo.fujita
> > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 3:59 PM
> > To: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [12/4rd week]
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I am investigating stability of Dom0 and DomU by using 
> various benchmark
> > tools.
> > We Fujitsu contribute with the results of benchmarks to 
> this community
> > periodically from now on.
> > 
> > Although it is only the detail result of unixbench this 
> time, we will post
> > the detail result of all benchmarks someday.
> > 
> > The tool used now is as follows.
> >  - unixbench4.1.0
> >  - bonnie++-1.03
> >  - ltp-full-20051103
> >  - iozone3_191
> >  - lmbench-3.0-a5
> > 
> > TEST ENVIRONMENT
> >     Machine          : Tiger4
> >     CPU              : Itanium2 1.5GHz *2 (Madison)
> >     MEM              : 8GB
> >     HDD              : Ultra 320 SCSI 36.7GB(MAS3367NC)
> >     KERN             : 2.6.12-xen0
> >     changeset        : 8372:7ef565a7cc86 (12/15 latest)
> >     Dom0 OS          : RHEL4 U2 (no SMP)
> >     DomU OS          : RHEL4 U2 (no SMP)
> >     No. of DomU's    : 1
> > 
> > SUMMARY
> >  - ltp-full-20051103 :hang in bench testing.
> >  - Iozone3_191       :hang in bench testing.
> >  - bonnie++-1.03     :bench is pass. but hang immediately after.
> > 
> > issues:
> >      - If changeset is after 8732, DomU will not start.
> > 
> > TEST RESULT
> >     unixbench4.1.0    : PASS
> >     bonnie++-1.03ã   : FAIL
> >     ltp-full-20051103 : FAIL
> >     iozone3_191       : PASS
> >     lmbench-3.0-a5    : PASS
> > Thanks and best regards,
> > Fujita and Fujisu members
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel