On 06.09.2011 23:22, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> thanks to both of You for Your replies. The problem is solved,
> exactly as Avi said, the DMA in windows got somehow disabled.
> So this certainly was not related to adding the memory...
>
> anyways, note for further generations:
> in w
Hello guys,
thanks to both of You for Your replies. The problem is solved,
exactly as Avi said, the DMA in windows got somehow disabled.
So this certainly was not related to adding the memory...
anyways, note for further generations:
in windows XP, the DMA usage can be checked in
Device Manager-
On 09/06/2011 07:30 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
OK, seems like Avi's right, at least the windows guest is not using DMA
though the question is, why did it got disabled
It can happen due to a timeout, perhaps a temporary load spike.
and how can I reenable it,
Google knows.
I'm not experience
OK, seems like Avi's right, at least the windows guest is not using DMA
though the question is, why did it got disabled and how can I reenable it,
I'm not experienced that much with XP :(
> It is rep/in-out. But why it became noticeable only after adding more
> physical memory to the host is a my
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 07:06:34PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/06/2011 07:01 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
> >> 404
> >ouch, dumb me :-/
> >http://nelide.cz/downloads/nik/trace.dat.bz2
> >sorry
> >n.
> >
>
> qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803169: kvm_emulate_insn:
> 0:806edb12: rep outsw
>
On 09/06/2011 06:38 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
Hello Avi,
thanks for quick reply!
> How many guests in there?
two currently (one x86_64 centos, one winXP), with more, the box get even more
unresponsive.
I don't really understand why the box is unresponsive. What do top and
'vmstat 1' say?
On 09/06/2011 07:06 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 09/06/2011 07:01 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
> 404
ouch, dumb me :-/
http://nelide.cz/downloads/nik/trace.dat.bz2
sorry
n.
qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803169: kvm_emulate_insn:
0:806edb12: rep outsw
qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803
On 09/06/2011 07:01 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
> 404
ouch, dumb me :-/
http://nelide.cz/downloads/nik/trace.dat.bz2
sorry
n.
qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803169: kvm_emulate_insn:
0:806edb12: rep outsw
qemu-kvm-4618 [000] 13698.803170: kvm_pio:
pio_write at 0x
> 404
ouch, dumb me :-/
http://nelide.cz/downloads/nik/trace.dat.bz2
sorry
n.
>
>>
>> >
>> > Please post /proc/mtrr and /proc/iomem.
>> [root@virtualbox ~]# cat /proc/mtrr
>> reg00: base=0x0 (0MB), size=16384MB, count=1: write-back
>> reg01: base=0x4 (16384MB), size= 4096MB, c
On 09/06/2011 06:38 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
Hello Avi,
thanks for quick reply!
> How many guests in there?
two currently (one x86_64 centos, one winXP), with more, the box get even more
unresponsive.
>
> Please post a trace as per http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tracing.
here it goes:
http:/
Hello Avi,
thanks for quick reply!
> How many guests in there?
two currently (one x86_64 centos, one winXP), with more, the box get even more
unresponsive.
>
> Please post a trace as per http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tracing.
here it goes:
http://nelide.cz/nik/trace.dat.bz2
>
> Please post /pro
On 09/06/2011 05:02 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to solve quite a weird problem on one of our customers' box.
It's quad core Xeon X3430 @ 2.40GHz, running 64bit centos with 2.6.38 (I also
tried upgrading to
2.6.39).
After increasing physical memory from 16 to 20GB, all guest got
Hello,
I'm trying to solve quite a weird problem on one of our customers' box.
It's quad core Xeon X3430 @ 2.40GHz, running 64bit centos with 2.6.38 (I also
tried upgrading to
2.6.39).
After increasing physical memory from 16 to 20GB, all guest got incredibly
slow, starting just
one windows or
13 matches
Mail list logo
