Virtualization - Aug 2007 - [kvm-devel] [PATCH 0/2][KVM] guest time accounting

Laurent Vivier wrote:
> The aim of these two patches is to measure the CPU time used by a virtual
> machine. All comments are welcome... I'm not sure it's the good way
to do that.
>
> [PATCH 1/2] introduce a new field, "guest", in cpustat to store
the time used by
> the CPU to run virtual CPU. Modify /proc/stat to display this new field.
>
> [PATCH 2/2] modify account_system_time() to add cputime to
cpustat->guest if we
> are running a VCPU. We add this cputime to  cpustat->user instead of
> cpustat->system because this part of KVM code is in fact user code
although it
> is executed in the kernel. We duplicate VCPU time between guest and user to
> allow an unmodified "top(1)" to display correct value. A modified
"top(1)" is
> able to display good cpu user time and cpu guest time by subtracting cpu
guest
> time from cpu user time.
>   
[copying Ingo and Rusty]

The patches look good.  A couple of comments:

- perhaps the new fields should be guarded by a #ifdef CONFIG_HYPERVISOR 
(selected by CONFIG_KVM)?  that way the (minor) additional overhead is 
only incurred if it can possibly be used.  I imagine that our canine 
cousin will want to use this as well.

- I think that there is per-task accounting of user time and system 
time; that should be extended as well.



-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Laurent Vivier wrote:
>> The aim of these two patches is to measure the CPU time used by a
virtual
>> machine. All comments are welcome... I'm not sure it's the good
way to
>> do that.
>>
>> [PATCH 1/2] introduce a new field, "guest", in cpustat to
store the
>> time used by
>> the CPU to run virtual CPU. Modify /proc/stat to display this new
field.
>>
>> [PATCH 2/2] modify account_system_time() to add cputime to
>> cpustat->guest if we
>> are running a VCPU. We add this cputime to  cpustat->user instead of
>> cpustat->system because this part of KVM code is in fact user code
>> although it
>> is executed in the kernel. We duplicate VCPU time between guest and
>> user to
>> allow an unmodified "top(1)" to display correct value. A
modified
>> "top(1)" is
>> able to display good cpu user time and cpu guest time by subtracting
>> cpu guest
>> time from cpu user time.
>>   
> 
> [copying Ingo and Rusty]
> 
> The patches look good.  A couple of comments:
> 
> - perhaps the new fields should be guarded by a #ifdef CONFIG_HYPERVISOR
> (selected by CONFIG_KVM)?  that way the (minor) additional overhead is
> only incurred if it can possibly be used.  I imagine that our canine
> cousin will want to use this as well.
There is also a CONFIG_VIRTUALIZATION and a CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING (from
s390 and powerpc) Which one to use ?

I'm wondering if we can have a more accurate accounting:

- For the moment we add all system time since the previous entering to the VCPU
to the guest time (and I guess there is some real system time in it ???)

- Perhaps we can sum nanoseconds spent in the VCPU and add it to cpustat when
these ns are greater than 1 ms ? (I'm trying to make something in this way)
> - I think that there is per-task accounting of user time and system
> time; that should be extended as well.
it should be easy to do too...

Laurent
-- 
------------- Laurent.Vivier@bull.net  --------------
          "Software is hard" - Donald Knuth

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url :
http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/virtualization/attachments/20070813/70eee960/signature.pgp