On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 9:43 AM Sergio Lopez <s...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Montes, Julio <julio.mon...@intel.com> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 16:09 +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 2:48 PM Sergio Lopez <s...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 05:21:46PM +0200, Sergio Lopez wrote:
> >> > > > Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 02:11:02PM +0200, Sergio Lopez wrote:
> >> > > > --------------
> >> > > > | Conclusion |
> >> > > > --------------
> >> > > >
> >> > > > The average boot time of microvm is a third of Q35's (115ms vs.
> >> > > > 363ms),
> >> > > > and is smaller on all sections (QEMU initialization, firmware
> >> > > > overhead
> >> > > > and kernel start-to-user).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Microvm's memory tree is also visibly simpler, significantly
> >> > > > reducing
> >> > > > the exposed surface to the guest.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > While we can certainly work on making Q35 smaller, I definitely
> >> > > > think
> >> > > > it's better (and way safer!) having a specialized machine type
> >> > > > for a
> >> > > > specific use case, than a minimal Q35 whose behavior
> >> > > > significantly
> >> > > > diverges from a conventional Q35.
> >> > >
> >> > > Interesting, so not a 10x difference! This might be amenable to
> >> > > optimization.
> >> > >
> >> > > My concern with microvm is that it's so limited that few users
> >> > > will be
> >> > > able to benefit from the reduced attack surface and faster
> >> > > startup time.
> >> > > I think it's worth investigating slimming down Q35 further first.
> >> > >
> >> > > In terms of startup time the first step would be profiling Q35
> >> > > kernel
> >> > > startup to find out what's taking so long (firmware
> >> > > initialization, PCI
> >> > > probing, etc)?
> >> >
> >> > Some findings:
> >> >
> >> > 1. Exposing the TSC_DEADLINE CPU flag (i.e. using "-cpu host")
> >> > saves a
> >> > whooping 120ms by avoiding the APIC timer calibration at
> >> > arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c:calibrate_APIC_clock
> >> >
> >> > Average boot time with "-cpu host"
> >> > qemu_init_end: 76.408950
> >> > linux_start_kernel: 116.166142 (+39.757192)
> >> > linux_start_user: 242.954347 (+126.788205)
> >> >
> >> > Average boot time with default "cpu"
> >> > qemu_init_end: 77.467852
> >> > linux_start_kernel: 116.688472 (+39.22062)
> >> > linux_start_user: 363.033365 (+246.344893)
> >>
> >> \o/
> >>
> >> > 2. The other 130ms are a direct result of PCI and ACPI presence
> >> > (tested
> >> > with a kernel without support for those elements). I'll publish
> >> > some
> >> > detailed numbers next week.
> >>
> >> Here are the Kata Containers kernel parameters:
> >>
> >> var kernelParams = []Param{
> >> {"tsc", "reliable"},
> >> {"no_timer_check", ""},
> >> {"rcupdate.rcu_expedited", "1"},
> >> {"i8042.direct", "1"},
> >> {"i8042.dumbkbd", "1"},
> >> {"i8042.nopnp", "1"},
> >> {"i8042.noaux", "1"},
> >> {"noreplace-smp", ""},
> >> {"reboot", "k"},
> >> {"console", "hvc0"},
> >> {"console", "hvc1"},
> >> {"iommu", "off"},
> >> {"cryptomgr.notests", ""},
> >> {"net.ifnames", "0"},
> >> {"pci", "lastbus=0"},
> >> }
> >>
> >> pci lastbus=0 looks interesting and so do some of the others :).
> >>
> >
> > yeah, pci=lastbus=0 is very helpful to reduce the boot time in q35,
> > kernel won't scan the 255.. buses :)
>
> I can confirm that adding pci=lastbus=0 makes a significant
> improvement. In fact, is the only option from Kata's kernel parameter
> list that has an impact, probably because the kernel is already quite
> minimalistic.
>
> Average boot time with "-cpu host" and "pci=lastbus=0"
> qemu_init_end: 73.711569
> linux_start_kernel: 113.414311 (+39.702742)
> linux_start_user: 190.949939 (+77.535628)
>
> That's still ~40% slower than microvm, and the breach quickly widens
> when adding more PCI devices (each one adds 10-15ms), but it's certainly
> an improvement over the original numbers.
>
> On the other hand, there isn't much we can do here from QEMU's
> perspective, as this is basically Guest OS tuning.
fw_cfg could expose this information so guest kernels know when to
stop enumerating the PCI bus. This would make all PCI guests with new
kernels boot ~50 ms faster, regardless of machine type.
The difference between microvm and tuned Q35 is 76 ms now.
microvm:
qemu_init_end: 64.043264
linux_start_kernel: 65.481782 (+1.438518)
linux_start_user: 114.938353 (+49.456571)
Q35 with -cpu host and pci=lasbus=0:
qemu_init_end: 73.711569
linux_start_kernel: 113.414311 (+39.702742)
linux_start_user: 190.949939 (+77.535628)
There is a ~39 ms difference before linux_start_kernel. SeaBIOS is
loading the PVH Option ROM.
Stefano: any recommendations for profiling or tuning SeaBIOS?
Stefan
