Messages in this thread | | | From | "Zhang, Yang Z" <> | Subject | RE: [v6] kvm/fpu: Enable fully eager restore kvm FPU | Date | Fri, 24 Apr 2015 07:46:42 +0000 |
| |
Paolo Bonzini wrote on 2015-04-24: > > > On 24/04/2015 03:16, Zhang, Yang Z wrote: >>> This is interesting since previous measurements on KVM have had the >>> exact opposite results. I think we need to understand this a lot >>> more. >> >> What I can tell is that vmexit is heavy. So it is reasonable to see >> the improvement under some cases, especially kernel is using eager >> FPU now which means each schedule may trigger a vmexit. > > On the other hand vmexit is lighter and lighter on newer processors; a > Sandy Bridge has less than half the vmexit cost of a Core 2 (IIRC 1000 > vs. 2500 clock cycles approximately). >
1000 cycles? I remember it takes about 4000 cycle even in HSW server.
> Also, measurement were done on Westmere but Sandy Bridge is the first > processor to have XSAVEOPT and thus use eager FPU. > > Paolo
Best regards, Yang
| |