Xen 
 
Home About Xen.org Xen Xen Summit Wiki Mailing List Bug Tracker Xen Downloads
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] poor domU VBD performance.

To: "Ian Pratt" <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Peter Bier" <peter_bier@xxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] poor domU VBD performance.
From: Andrew Theurer <habanero@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:18:19 -0600
Delivery-date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:18:28 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <A95E2296287EAD4EB592B5DEEFCE0E9D1E38CC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <A95E2296287EAD4EB592B5DEEFCE0E9D1E38CC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.5
On Monday 28 March 2005 14:14, Ian Pratt wrote:
> > > > > I found out that dom0 does file-system IO and raw IO ( using
> > > > > dd as a tool to test
> > > > > throughput from the disk ) is about exactly the same as when
> > > > > using a standard
> > > > > linux kernel without XEN. But the raw IO from DomU to an
> > > > > unused disk ( a second
> > > > > disk in the system ) is limited to fourty percent of the
> > > > > speed I get within Dom0.
> >
> > Is the second disk exactly the same as the first one?  I'll
> > try an IO test
> > here on the same disk array with dom0 and domU and see what I get.
>
> I've reproduced the problem and its a real issue.
>
> It only affects reads, and is almost certainly down to how the blkback
> driver passes requests down to the actual device.
>
> Does anyone on the list actually understand the changes made to linux
> block IO between 2.4 and 2.6?
>
> In the 2.6 blkfront there is no run_task_queue() to flush requests to
> the lower layer, and we use submit_bio() instead of 2.4's
> generic_make_request(). It looks like this is happening syncronously
> rather than queueing multiple requests. What should we be doing to cause
> things to be batched?

There are multiple IO schedulers in 2.6.  Do you know which one is being used?  
It should say somewhere in the boot log.  Some read-ahead code also changed 
in 2.6.10-11 range.

So far I have not been able to reproduce this in xen-unstable with 2.6.  I am 
building xen-2.0.5 for a look.

-Andrew

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