From owner-soc-status@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 12 16:54:05 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: soc-status@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19168906 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 16:54:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qg0-x22f.google.com (mail-qg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF34321DF for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 16:54:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id q108so2021384qgd.6 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 09:54:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=Xw2S9/Ly4gPZue/ocwdMU7yLw9GqZS0cs46QUfpDIz4=; b=VCBXxuZG71A8BnIRgpcKsGu7+yrnMIzZ0hFcQFMULipNkI/oS7mizr68G6VxTny0Nd QQCYYmh1oZwI3lYF1emwQjUhuD3+HqU6VeJ1pj/ujD2J+sKL7mPZzWH080+wIXX0WM/f OzhAOCyM2A7m0+nbwKhG5k/DCKl32DBnSLd7xO4CoW+0OTb7Glc0YITf208HtyHJ8R3Y AoEIbPhjz58ebm6yVfVdFZBebXK0hQ6tjDpBPu65cFgkSTFTmvjGikHdJY+7rhUXGdkb K/8ezb7XQYlOwlo+rC77HwQOx35Rk50MGsE2QAbgCbKNO1VFWbkCPAlFT5yYfF/nclyP bvOQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.111.196 with SMTP id t4mr6811849qap.63.1405184044067; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 09:54:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.84.85 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 09:54:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:54:04 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GSOC] bhyve instruction caching From: Mihai Carabas To: soc-status@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: soc-status@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Summer of Code Status Reports and Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 16:54:05 -0000 Hi, > At the end of the week I will come with some new results with the > microbenchmarking. So I've redone the microbenchmarking tests and the page-table protection didn't cause a significant performance degradation (the new locking for the cache logic correlated with the more frequent cache evictions): for 1000000 accesses to the lapic-id we have an average of 6800 ticks per VM_EXIT for an instruction emulation (before writeprotecting the page tables it was 6200). The numbers WITHOUT cache instruction are at about 10000~10400. So, when watching at the microbenchmarking we have an improvement of ~35%. > > Also I'm looking for new real-world benchmarks to see where we can > benefict a lot from the instruction caching feature. I've started doing to kind of benchmarks: * CPU intensive (ex: a bash script that increments in a loop a variable) * benchmarks that creates lot of short processes (not CPU intensive but short running I/O intensive): make buildworld -j2 I will come with some concrete results in the next week. Meanwhile I will add some new statistics like "Cache hits" and "Cache evictions" to see how my cache behavious in each of the benchmarks. Thanks, Mihai