thr3ads.net - Xen devel - [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy [Mar 2007]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Suzanne McIntosh

2007-Mar-26 19:47 UTC

[Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

Hi, 
I am looking for performance numbers comparing the network driver flip vs. 
copy feature 
on a 32-bit machine. Could not locate this info in Xen archives. Would 
appreciate any help. 

Thanks, Sue
_______________________________________________________________
Suzanne McIntosh
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Secure Systems and Services


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

Santos, Jose Renato G

2007-Mar-26 22:25 UTC

head link

RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Suzanne
McIntosh
	Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:48 PM
	To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
	Cc: Suzanne McIntosh
	Subject: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs.
copy
	
	

	Hi, 
	I am looking for performance numbers comparing the network
driver flip vs. copy feature 
	on a 32-bit machine. Could not locate this info in Xen archives.
Would appreciate any help. 
	
	Thanks, Sue 
	_______________________________________________________________
	Suzanne McIntosh 
	IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
	Secure Systems and Services 
	

Here is some old data that I have for comparing page flip with copy.
Note that this for Xen unstable  as of October 3, 2006.
I don''t more recent data, but I believe the relative performance should
not have changed much, although the absolute numbers may be different
now.

I hope this helps

Renato
> Here are the results comparing copy and page flip.
> These results were using netperf TCP_STREAM test which use large size 
> packets.
> I run experiments for receiving and transmiting to from/to a external 
> client.
> The results show that copying use less cycles than page flip but dom0 
> has higher utilization (due to the copy).
> This caused dom0 cpu to saturate and reduced the throuhgput slightly
in> my machine. I have a 4way Intel Xeon 2.8Ghz with 4GB of RAM (each
domain> is using 512 MB of RAM).
> Copy is also better for the transmit experiment since the overhead for
> processing ACKs is reduced.
> 
> I will work on the transmit side optimizations starting tomorrow.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Renato
> 
> ======================================================> receive:
> ------------------------------------------------------_
>      |        |                    | cycles/packet    |
>      |  Rate  |  CPU utilization   |  (thousands)     |
>      |  Mb/s  | dom0  dom1   tot   | dom0  dom1  tot  |
> -------------------------------------------------------
> flip | 941.34 | 84.2% 76.3% 160.4% | 30.1  27.2  57.3 |
> copy | 907.71 | 99.7% 45.2% 144.9% | 36.9  16.7  53.6 |
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> transmit:
> ------------------------------------
>      |        |                    |
>      |  Rate  |  CPU utilization   |
>      |  Mb/s  | dom0  dom1   tot   |
> ------------------------------------
> flip | 941.31 | 49.6% 43.9%  93.5% |
> copy | 941.30 | 45.2% 34.5%  79.7% |
> ------------------------------------
________________________________

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

Suzanne McIntosh

2007-Mar-27 18:14 UTC

head link

RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

Thanks so much - this is very helpful.
For comparison purposes, it would be great to know the message size. Also 
wondering if doms were pinned?

Regards, Sue

_______________________________________________________________
Suzanne McIntosh
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Secure Systems and Services





"Santos, Jose Renato G" <joserenato.santos@hp.com> 
Sent by: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
03/26/2007 06:25 PM

To
Suzanne McIntosh/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Xen Development Mailing List <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject
RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy






 

                 From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Suzanne
McIntosh
                 Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:48 PM
                 To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
                 Cc: Suzanne McIntosh
                 Subject: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip 
vs.
copy
 
 

                 Hi, 
                 I am looking for performance numbers comparing the 
network
driver flip vs. copy feature 
                 on a 32-bit machine. Could not locate this info in Xen 
archives.
Would appreciate any help. 
 
                 Thanks, Sue 
 _______________________________________________________________
                 Suzanne McIntosh 
                 IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
                 Secure Systems and Services 
 

Here is some old data that I have for comparing page flip with copy.
Note that this for Xen unstable  as of October 3, 2006.
I don''t more recent data, but I believe the relative performance should
not have changed much, although the absolute numbers may be different
now.

I hope this helps

Renato
> Here are the results comparing copy and page flip.
> These results were using netperf TCP_STREAM test which use large size 
> packets.
> I run experiments for receiving and transmiting to from/to a external 
> client.
> The results show that copying use less cycles than page flip but dom0 
> has higher utilization (due to the copy).
> This caused dom0 cpu to saturate and reduced the throuhgput slightly
in> my machine. I have a 4way Intel Xeon 2.8Ghz with 4GB of RAM (each
domain> is using 512 MB of RAM).
> Copy is also better for the transmit experiment since the overhead for
> processing ACKs is reduced.
> 
> I will work on the transmit side optimizations starting tomorrow.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Renato
> 
> ======================================================> receive:
> ------------------------------------------------------_
>      |        |                    | cycles/packet    |
>      |  Rate  |  CPU utilization   |  (thousands)     |
>      |  Mb/s  | dom0  dom1   tot   | dom0  dom1  tot  |
> -------------------------------------------------------
> flip | 941.34 | 84.2% 76.3% 160.4% | 30.1  27.2  57.3 |
> copy | 907.71 | 99.7% 45.2% 144.9% | 36.9  16.7  53.6 |
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> transmit:
> ------------------------------------
>      |        |                    |
>      |  Rate  |  CPU utilization   |
>      |  Mb/s  | dom0  dom1   tot   |
> ------------------------------------
> flip | 941.31 | 49.6% 43.9%  93.5% |
> copy | 941.30 | 45.2% 34.5%  79.7% |
> ------------------------------------
________________________________

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



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

Santos, Jose Renato G

2007-Mar-27 18:28 UTC

head link

RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

This data was for transferring 1500 byte data packets with TCP. Note
that the difference of performance on transmit is due to the receive of
ACK packets (small size).
The domains were not explicitly pinned, but since there were only two
domains (dom0 and domU) in a 4-cpu machine they were running on
different CPUs.
 
Renato


________________________________

	From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Suzanne
McIntosh
	Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:15 AM
	To: Santos, Jose Renato G
	Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com; Suzanne McIntosh
	Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip
vs. copy
	
	

	Thanks so much - this is very helpful. 
	For comparison purposes, it would be great to know the message
size. Also wondering if doms were pinned? 
	
	Regards, Sue 
	
	_______________________________________________________________
	Suzanne McIntosh 
	IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
	Secure Systems and Services
	
	
	
	
	
"Santos, Jose Renato G" <joserenato.santos@hp.com> 
Sent by: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com 

03/26/2007 06:25 PM 

To
Suzanne McIntosh/Watson/IBM@IBMUS 
cc
Xen Development Mailing List <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> 
Subject
RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

	




	 
	
	                From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
	[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of
Suzanne
	McIntosh
	                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:48 PM
	                To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
	                Cc: Suzanne McIntosh
	                Subject: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers
for flip vs.
	copy
	                
	                
	
	                Hi, 
	                I am looking for performance numbers comparing
the network
	driver flip vs. copy feature 
	                on a 32-bit machine. Could not locate this info
in Xen archives.
	Would appreciate any help. 
	                
	                Thanks, Sue 
	
_______________________________________________________________
	                Suzanne McIntosh 
	                IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
	                Secure Systems and Services 
	                
	
	Here is some old data that I have for comparing page flip with
copy.
	Note that this for Xen unstable  as of October 3, 2006.
	I don''t more recent data, but I believe the relative performance
should
	not have changed much, although the absolute numbers may be
different
	now.
	
	I hope this helps
	
	Renato
	
	> Here are the results comparing copy and page flip.
	> These results were using netperf TCP_STREAM test which use
large size 
	> packets.
	> I run experiments for receiving and transmiting to from/to a
external 
	> client.
	> The results show that copying use less cycles than page flip
but dom0 
	> has higher utilization (due to the copy).
	> This caused dom0 cpu to saturate and reduced the throuhgput
slightly
	in
	> my machine. I have a 4way Intel Xeon 2.8Ghz with 4GB of RAM
(each
	domain
	> is using 512 MB of RAM).
	> Copy is also better for the transmit experiment since the
overhead for
	
	> processing ACKs is reduced.
	> 
	> I will work on the transmit side optimizations starting
tomorrow.
	> 
	> Regards
	> 
	> Renato
	> 
	> ======================================================	> receive:
	> ------------------------------------------------------_
	>      |        |                    | cycles/packet    |
	>      |  Rate  |  CPU utilization   |  (thousands)     |
	>      |  Mb/s  | dom0  dom1   tot   | dom0  dom1  tot  |
	> -------------------------------------------------------
	> flip | 941.34 | 84.2% 76.3% 160.4% | 30.1  27.2  57.3 |
	> copy | 907.71 | 99.7% 45.2% 144.9% | 36.9  16.7  53.6 |
	> -------------------------------------------------------
	> 
	> transmit:
	> ------------------------------------
	>      |        |                    |
	>      |  Rate  |  CPU utilization   |
	>      |  Mb/s  | dom0  dom1   tot   |
	> ------------------------------------
	> flip | 941.31 | 49.6% 43.9%  93.5% |
	> copy | 941.30 | 45.2% 34.5%  79.7% |
	> ------------------------------------
	
	________________________________
	
	_______________________________________________
	Xen-devel mailing list
	Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
	http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
	
	



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

Xen devel - Mar 2007 - Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

[Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy

RE: [Xen-devel] Seeking performance numbers for flip vs. copy