Open Stack

On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 07:21:38PM +0000, Montes, Julio wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-05-28 at 12:10 -0700, Maran Wilson wrote:
> > On 5/28/2019 11:54 AM, Whaley, Graham wrote:
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Dr. David Alan Gilbert [mailto:dgilbert at redhat.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 7:40 PM
> > > > To: Montes, Julio <julio.montes at intel.com>; pbonzini at redhat.com
> > > > Cc: kata-dev at lists.katacontainers.io
> > > > Subject: Re: [kata-dev] QEMU 4 and QEMU-lite
> > > > 
> > > > * Montes, Julio (julio.montes at intel.com) wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2019-05-28 at 18:19 +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > * Montes, Julio (julio.montes at intel.com) wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi kata-folks
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > One of the topics in today's agent was QEMU 4 and the work
> > > > > > > that we
> > > > > > > are doing to support it in Kata Containers.
> > > > > > > I ran the boot time and memory footprint metrics in my
> > > > > > > workstation
> > > > > > > to compare QEMU 4 vs QEMU-lite (2.11).
> > > > > > > Here the results.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Feel free to comment and raise your concerns about QEMU 4.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > So that looks pretty nice for QEMU 4; at least as fast and in
> > > > > > the noise on the memory usage?
> > > > > 
> > > > > yeah - IMO QEMU 4 has a good performance and new features, it's
> > > > > a good
> > > > > hypervisor for Kata Containers.
> > > > 
> > > > Great!  Please keep running these tests to make sure we don't
> > > > regress in
> > > > future versions (especially on our soft-freezes etc so we can
> > > > spot
> > > > them before the next release.
> > > 
> > > We do have a 'metrics CI' running on Kata, that in theory would
> > > detect any major (roughly
> > > +/- 5%) shifts - but, that would only happen when Kata updates the
> > > version of Qemu it is tracking...
> > > And, yes, we will almost definitely have to tweak that CI to
> > > account for the new numbers when we land
> > > The qemu4 PR ...
> > 
> > Just curious about whether you are providing the uncompressed kernel 
> > image in these Qemu 4 tests or not. Qemu 4.0 supports booting the 
> > uncompressed kernel binary in order to reduce boot time (if the
> > kernel 
> 
> \o/ interesting I will try, thanks.
> 

As Maran, I'm also curious about a comparison with the new QEMU 4.0
feature to boot uncompressed kernel binary.

Here you can find some useful information (I hope :)):
https://gist.github.com/stefano-garzarella/7b7e17e75add20abd1c42fb496cc6504

Thanks,
Stefano