From: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com>
To: Ali Saidi <alisaidi@amazon.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maz@kernel.org, me@davidreaver.com,
oliver.upton@linux.dev, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
yuzenghui@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Limit stage2_apply_range() batch size to smallest block
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 14:41:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240404214156.GF2178@templeofstupid.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240404212742.11248-1-alisaidi@amazon.com>
On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 09:27:42PM +0000, Ali Saidi wrote:
> > Just a quick followup that I did test Will's patches and didn't find
> > that it changed the performance of the workload that I'd been testing.
> > IOW, I wasn't able to discern a network performance difference between
> > the baseline and those changes.
>
> That is a bit unexpected that the performance wasn't worse with the patch Will
> sent because it should have disabled the range invalidates since they these
> invalidates will be getting rid of blocks? Which Graviton were you testing
> this on?
Sorry I didn't mention it earlier. This was on a Graviton 4 with
FEAT_TLBIRANGE. Due to the placement of the test machine and the client
the max single flow rate was 5Gbps, and with both the baseline and
Will's patches I wasn't able to discern any slowdown there, at least in
terms of impact to the adjacent networking traffic. I saw an approx 1%
slowdown with multiple flows at 10Gbps, but didn't have a baseline for
that test case so was hesitant to offer it as conclusive. I should be
clear that I _wasn't_ measuring the the teardown times in this test
-- just how the teardown itself impacted the networking performance.
-K
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-04 22:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-28 19:04 [RFC] KVM: arm64: improving IO performance during unmap? Krister Johansen
2024-03-28 19:05 ` [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Limit stage2_apply_range() batch size to smallest block Krister Johansen
2024-03-29 13:48 ` Oliver Upton
2024-03-29 19:15 ` Krister Johansen
2024-03-30 10:17 ` Marc Zyngier
2024-04-02 17:00 ` Krister Johansen
2024-04-04 4:40 ` Krister Johansen
2024-04-04 21:27 ` Ali Saidi
2024-04-04 21:41 ` Krister Johansen [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240404214156.GF2178@templeofstupid.com \
--to=kjlx@templeofstupid.com \
--cc=alisaidi@amazon.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=me@davidreaver.com \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).