Xen devel - Aug 2006 - RE: [PATCH] Optimizing x86-64 xenlinux using global pagesfor user mode (take 2)

> The previous patch had a problem with the builder, which constructs
the
> initial page tables with the USER bit on. And Xen couldn''t
distinguish
> kernel or use pages. It was partially checked avoiding the bug, and
it''s
> finished with this patch.
Thanks. Have you any updated benchmark numbers as the bug could have
been giving quite a performance boost before.

Thanks,
Ian

 
>  linux-2.6-xen-sparse/include/asm-i386/mach-xen/asm/hypervisor.h |
4
> ++
>  linux-2.6-xen-sparse/include/asm-x86_64/mach-xen/asm/pgtable.h  |
19
> +++++-----
>  tools/libxc/xc_linux_build.c                                    |
3
> +
>  tools/libxc/xg_private.h                                        |
3
> +
>  xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c                                     |
2
> -
>  xen/arch/x86/flushtlb.c                                         |
7
> +++
>  xen/arch/x86/mm.c                                               |
12
> ++++--
>  xen/arch/x86/x86_64/traps.c                                     |
2
> -
>  xen/include/asm-x86/flushtlb.h                                  |
8
> +++-
>  xen/include/asm-x86/x86_64/page.h                               |
8
> +++-
>  10 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
> 
> Jun
> ---
> Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Ian Pratt wrote:
>> The previous patch had a problem with the builder, which constructs the
>> initial page tables with the USER bit on. And Xen couldn''t
distinguish
>> kernel or use pages. It was partially checked avoiding the bug, and
it''s
>> finished with this patch.
>
> Thanks. Have you any updated benchmark numbers as the bug could have
> been giving quite a performance boost before.
FWIW, I had been running more extensive testing on changeset 11225 
(before global-bit) and 11229 (global-bit with revert/fix for dom0 
builder), and they do not match the initial testing I did with rev 11118 
+ global_1 patch.  In fact, I am not seeing really any improvement.  I 
am not sure what is wrong.  Should I just test 
xen-unstable-tip+newest_patch and see where we stand?

-Andrew Theurer


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