On 06/07/2021 16:22, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 06.07.2021 17:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 06.07.2021 16:11, Olaf Hering wrote:
>>> Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:58:04 +0200
>>> schrieb Olaf Hering :
>>>
the reporting is broken since a while
>>> A quick check on a Dell T320 with E5-2430L, which does not
On 06.07.2021 17:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 06.07.2021 16:11, Olaf Hering wrote:
>> Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:58:04 +0200
>> schrieb Olaf Hering :
>>
>>> the reporting is broken since a while
>>
>> A quick check on a Dell T320 with E5-2430L, which does not have "Page
>> Modification Logging", indicat
On 06.07.2021 16:11, Olaf Hering wrote:
> Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:58:04 +0200
> schrieb Olaf Hering :
>
>> the reporting is broken since a while
>
> A quick check on a Dell T320 with E5-2430L, which does not have "Page
> Modification Logging", indicates that staging-4.5 appears to work, but
> rep
Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:58:04 +0200
schrieb Olaf Hering :
> the reporting is broken since a while
A quick check on a Dell T320 with E5-2430L, which does not have "Page
Modification Logging", indicates that staging-4.5 appears to work, but
reporting in staging-4.6 is broken.
Olaf
pgpvrugZq6Cre
On 06.07.2021 15:34, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 06/07/2021 13:03, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 06.07.2021 13:23, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> 'count * sizeof(*pfns)' can in principle overflow, but is implausible in
>>> practice as the time between checkpoints is typically sub-second.
>>> Nevertheless, simpl
On 06.07.2021 15:19, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 06/07/2021 13:58, Olaf Hering wrote:
>> Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 12:23:32 +0100
>> schrieb Andrew Cooper :
>>
>>> +count = stats.dirty_count;
>> Is this accurate?
>
> The live loop relies on it, and it worked correctly the last time I
> tested it.
When
On 06/07/2021 14:39, Olaf Hering wrote:
> Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:22:58 +0100
> schrieb Andrew Cooper :
>
>> What hardware is this on? i.e. is the Page Modification Logging feature
>> in use?
> At least it gets reported as VMX feature during boot, this is a CoyotePass
> system.
That logging is pro
Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:22:58 +0100
schrieb Andrew Cooper :
> What hardware is this on? i.e. is the Page Modification Logging feature
> in use?
At least it gets reported as VMX feature during boot, this is a CoyotePass
system.
Olaf
pgpwQDzeiSuN6.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
On 06/07/2021 13:03, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 06.07.2021 13:23, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> 'count * sizeof(*pfns)' can in principle overflow, but is implausible in
>> practice as the time between checkpoints is typically sub-second.
>> Nevertheless, simplify the code and remove the risk.
>>
>> There is
Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:19:21 +0100
schrieb Andrew Cooper :
> > 20: faults= 0 dirty= 80
>
> What is this showing, other than (unsurprisingly) faults doesn't work
> for an HVM guest?
The dirty count goes down after a while for a domU that constantly touches as
many pages as it can.
But yes, the
On 06/07/2021 14:19, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 06/07/2021 13:58, Olaf Hering wrote:
>> Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 12:23:32 +0100
>> schrieb Andrew Cooper :
>>
>>> +count = stats.dirty_count;
>> Is this accurate?
> The live loop relies on it, and it worked correctly the last time I
> tested it.
>
>> I r
On 06/07/2021 13:58, Olaf Hering wrote:
> Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 12:23:32 +0100
> schrieb Andrew Cooper :
>
>> +count = stats.dirty_count;
> Is this accurate?
The live loop relies on it, and it worked correctly the last time I
tested it.
> I remember the reporting is broken since a while, and tes
Am Tue, 6 Jul 2021 12:23:32 +0100
schrieb Andrew Cooper :
> +count = stats.dirty_count;
Is this accurate?
I remember the reporting is broken since a while, and testing a busy domU
indicates it is still the case.
# xen-logdirty `xl domid domU`
0: faults= 0 dirty= 258050
1: faults= 0 dirty=
On 06.07.2021 13:23, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> 'count * sizeof(*pfns)' can in principle overflow, but is implausible in
> practice as the time between checkpoints is typically sub-second.
> Nevertheless, simplify the code and remove the risk.
>
> There is no need to loop over the bitmap to calculate
'count * sizeof(*pfns)' can in principle overflow, but is implausible in
practice as the time between checkpoints is typically sub-second.
Nevertheless, simplify the code and remove the risk.
There is no need to loop over the bitmap to calculate count. The number of
set bits is returned in xc_sha
15 matches
Mail list logo
