From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>
Subject: Re: inaccurate dirty_count from XEN_DOMCTL_SHADOW_OP
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 13:50:40 +0200
Message-ID: <20170330135040.7fca7b48.olaf@aepfle.de>
References: <20170321095037.GA22242@aepfle.de>
 <20170322104628.GA21170@aepfle.de>
 <20170322105909.GA24055@aepfle.de>
 <2b4fb138-2d53-1b35-978d-86e9884d38c9@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1136462341610203731=="
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <2b4fb138-2d53-1b35-978d-86e9884d38c9@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
 <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
 <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Sender: "Xen-devel" <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

--===============1136462341610203731==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 boundary="Sig_/=tG.c9Os3DqG/EtA9gI9nKs"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"

--Sig_/=tG.c9Os3DqG/EtA9gI9nKs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Am Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:40:34 +0100
schrieb Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>:

> On 22/03/17 10:59, Olaf Hering wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 22, Olaf Hering wrote:
> > =20
> >> Did the xc_shadow_control API change at some point? =20
> > ... staging-4.5 works, while staging-4.6 does not. =20
>=20
> Can you describe in a little more detail what you are testing?

In the PV domU I run this memdirty tool to touch an amount of pages.
In the dom0 I run logdirty to see how many pages are dirty. With older Xen =
version the rate of dirty pages is high and constant. With 4.6+ the rate go=
es down after a while.

If you have trouble with reproducing I will prepare a simple testcase.

Olaf

--Sig_/=tG.c9Os3DqG/EtA9gI9nKs
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EARECAB0WIQSkRyP6Rn//f03pRUBdQqD6ppg2fgUCWNzxEAAKCRBdQqD6ppg2
fgi/AJ4yGZGl9NjOfB3/d/E0EkElVkyJTQCg7mmFQapNUl1mrXHB3dWQjzMXRSY=
=rUQ8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Sig_/=tG.c9Os3DqG/EtA9gI9nKs--


--===============1136462341610203731==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline

X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KWGVuLWRldmVs
IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApYZW4tZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMueGVuLm9yZwpodHRwczovL2xpc3RzLnhlbi5v
cmcveGVuLWRldmVsCg==

--===============1136462341610203731==--