From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59021) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fG4JP-0005LO-6w for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 May 2018 11:13:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fG4JL-0007Hg-8u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 May 2018 11:13:55 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:57572 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fG4JL-0007H9-4W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 May 2018 11:13:51 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FE4F4182D59 for ; Tue, 8 May 2018 15:13:50 +0000 (UTC) From: Juan Quintela In-Reply-To: <20180503173154.GL2660@work-vm> (David Alan Gilbert's message of "Thu, 3 May 2018 18:31:55 +0100") References: <20180425111940.1030-1-quintela@redhat.com> <20180425111940.1030-4-quintela@redhat.com> <20180503173154.GL2660@work-vm> Reply-To: quintela@redhat.com Date: Tue, 08 May 2018 17:16:06 +0200 Message-ID: <87sh726uvd.fsf@secure.laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v8 3/8] tests: Add migration xbzrle test List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, lvivier@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" wrote: > * Juan Quintela (quintela@redhat.com) wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela >> Reviewed-by: Peter Xu >> + >> + migrate_set_parameter(from, "xbzrle-cache-size", "33554432"); > > I still worry about the cache size relative to the size of memory we're > actually changing in the test; I don't quite understand why it's turning > out to get lots of hits. I planned this as a smorke test. But what value do you have in mind? > Also, xbzrle eats so much CPU we'll still have to watch out for the low > end CPUs. Any concrete suggestion? My plan would have been to push on my next pull request: Add migration precopy test Add migration xbzrle test Migration ppc now inlines its program And put the rest of the patches with fixes for another review. Later, Juan.