Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:01:55 +0300
From: Roman Kagan <rkagan@virtuozzo.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
CC: Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/6] KVM: x86: avoid redundant REQ_EVENT
Message-ID: <20161220100155.GF2081@rkaganb.sw.ru>
Mail-Followup-To: Roman Kagan <rkagan@virtuozzo.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        rkrcmar@redhat.com
References: <1482140838-6303-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
 <e805e616-f840-8cb2-3133-4557c80afff9@virtuozzo.com>
 <672a23fe-3df7-dd1b-27ee-4b453ca33236@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <672a23fe-3df7-dd1b-27ee-4b453ca33236@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:22
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Dec 2016 10:02:01.6572 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0802MB2474
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 964
Lines: 31

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 03:30:17PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 19/12/2016 14:05, Denis Plotnikov wrote:
> >>
> > This new patch-set does avoid unnecessary interrupt re-injections -
> > checked.
> > 
> > The test (MS Windows, sending messages between multiple windows using
> > windows-specific interface),
> > which showed performance growth with "[PATCH v2] KVM: x86: avoid
> > redundant REQ_EVENT" showed pretty much the same performance level with
> > this new patch-set.
> > The test score difference (+2.4% to [PATCH v2]) is within the tolerance
> > range(5%).
> > 
> > The test score on mainstream v4.9 kernel CPU Intel i5-2400, guest
> > Windows Server 2012 2VCPU, 2GB:
> > 
> > without patch: 31510 (+/- 4%)
> >    with patch: 36270 (+/- 5%)
> > 
> > difference = (36270-31510)/31510 * 100 = +15% -- looks good!
> 
> Awesome!  I hope it also qualifies as less ugly. :)

Absolutely.  FWIW

Reviewed-by: Roman Kagan <rkagan@virtuozzo.com>

Roman.