On 23.05.14 12:11, Michael Neuling wrote:
Also, is there any performance penalty associated with split core mode?
If not, could we just always default to split-by-4 on POWER8 bare metal?
Yeah, there is a performance hit . When you are split (ie
subcores_per_core = 2 or 4), the core is stuck in SMT8 mode. So if you
only have 1 thread active (others napped), you won't get the benefit of
ST mode in the core (more register renames per HW thread, more FXUs,
more FPUs etc).
Ok, imagine I have 1 core with SMT8. I have one process running at 100%
occupying one thread, the other 7 threads are idle.
Do I get performance benefits from having the other threads idle? Or do
I have to configure the system into SMT1 mode to get my ST benefits?
You automatically get the performance benefit when they are idle. When
threads enter nap, the core is able to reduce it's SMT mode
automatically.
Unless in split core mode - meh. That's a real bummer then, yeah.
If it's the latter, we could just have ppc64_cpu --smt=x also set the
subcore amount in parallel to the thread count.
FWIW on powernv we just nap the threads on hotplug.
The reason I'm bringing this up is that I'm not quite sure who would be
the instance doing these performance tweaks. So I'd guess the majority
of users will simply miss out on them.
Everyone, it's automatic on idle... except for split core mode
unfortunately.
Oh I meant when you want to use a POWER system as VM host, you have to
know about split core mode and configure it accordingly. That's
something someone needs to do. And it's different from x86 which means
people may miss out on it for their performance benchmarks.
But if we impose a general performance penalty for everyone with it, I
don't think split core mode should be enabled by default.
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
