From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] KVM: MMU: lower the aduit frequency Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 13:27:43 -0300 Message-ID: <20100901162743.GA12870@amt.cnet> References: <4C78FA00.8090606@cn.fujitsu.com> <4C7B867D.9080500@cn.fujitsu.com> <4C7B8759.60900@cn.fujitsu.com> <20100830154719.GB12707@amt.cnet> <4C7C687D.2000401@cn.fujitsu.com> <4C7E179D.6000405@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Xiao Guangrong , LKML , KVM To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C7E179D.6000405@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 12:06:37PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 08/31/2010 05:27 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > > > >>I've always seen progress from the guest while running with audit > >>enabled (its slow, but its not supposed to be fast anyway). > >> > >>Did you experience a freeze? > >> > >There is a simply test in the guest if it's not rate limit: > > > ># time ls > >anaconda-ks.cfg Documents install.log Music Public Videos > >Desktop Downloads install.log.syslog Pictures Templates > > > >real 1m26.053s > >user 0m0.311s > >sys 0m1.813s > > > >'ls' command cost about 1.5 minute, if we run the memory test program, i think > >the time/delay is unacceptable...... :-( > > Marcelo, would making the ratelimit optional help? personally I > think without ratelimit audit is useless, and with ratelimit it is a > lot less useful but can still point out problems. But I haven't > used it in a while. Was just wondering whether there was a freeze. Patchset looks good (ratelimit can be disabled manually).