Paul Mackerras writes:
> On pseries, performance is about 2.4% worse without new hcalls, but
> that is less than 1 standard deviation. With new hcalls, performance
> is 0.95% worse, only a third of a standard deviation. I think we need
> to do more measurements to try to get a more accurate pict
On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 05:51:06PM -0700, Ram Pai wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 09:04:17AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 03:35:32PM -0700, Ram Pai wrote:
> > >
> > > I like the idea of not tracking the slots at all. It is something the
> > > guest should not be knowin
Ram Pai writes:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 09:04:17AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 03:35:32PM -0700, Ram Pai wrote:
>> >
>> > I like the idea of not tracking the slots at all. It is something the
>> > guest should not be knowing or tracking.
>>
>> Why do you say that?
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
>
>
>> I looked at the perf data and with the test, we are doing larger number
>> of hash faults and then around 10k flush_hash_range. Can the small
>> improvement in number be due to the fact that we are not storing slot
>> number when doi
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
> I looked at the perf data and with the test, we are doing larger number
> of hash faults and then around 10k flush_hash_range. Can the small
> improvement in number be due to the fact that we are not storing slot
> number when doing an insert now?. Also in the flush
Paul Mackerras writes:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:57:13AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/27/2017 10:04 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
>> >How do we interpret these numbers? Are they times, or speed? Is
>> >larger better or worse?
>>
>> Sorry for not including the details. They ar
Paul Mackerras writes:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:57:13AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/27/2017 10:04 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
>> >How do we interpret these numbers? Are they times, or speed? Is
>> >larger better or worse?
>>
>> Sorry for not including the details. They ar
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 09:04:17AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 03:35:32PM -0700, Ram Pai wrote:
> >
> > I like the idea of not tracking the slots at all. It is something the
> > guest should not be knowing or tracking.
>
> Why do you say that?
'slot' is a internal mech
On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 03:35:32PM -0700, Ram Pai wrote:
>
> I like the idea of not tracking the slots at all. It is something the
> guest should not be knowing or tracking.
Why do you say that?
Paul.
Ram Pai writes:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:57:13AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>>
>>
> >>
>> >
>
> What does 'With series and no hcall' mean? does it mean -- no calls to new
> hcalls,
> instead use H_READ_4 followed by old HCALLs?
That is correct.
>
> And I am assuming the code i
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:57:13AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>
>
> On 10/27/2017 10:04 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> >On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 09:38:17AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>With hash translation mode we always tracked the hash pte slot details in
> >>linux page tab
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:57:13AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>
>
> On 10/27/2017 10:04 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> >How do we interpret these numbers? Are they times, or speed? Is
> >larger better or worse?
>
> Sorry for not including the details. They are time in seconds. Test case is
>
On 10/27/2017 10:04 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 09:38:17AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
Hi,
With hash translation mode we always tracked the hash pte slot details in linux
page table.
This occupied space in the linux page table and also limitted our ability to
suppor
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 09:38:17AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With hash translation mode we always tracked the hash pte slot details in
> linux page table.
> This occupied space in the linux page table and also limitted our ability to
> support
> linux features that require additio
14 matches
Mail list logo
