Open Stack

Hi

In order to reduce the noise, I re-ran the tests in a new no-GUI system.
In the case of QEMU4+PVH the boot time is a little bit better but the memory
footprint is bigger than qemu4 and qemu-lite. Here the results


[cid:a6bdb98d6536701ca8d4b30ea31d0507cf6e95f3.camel at intel.com]

[cid:84d6f227a6d69b926015c0b9d916c3d5f4ddd746.camel at intel.com]

On Wed, 2019-05-29 at 11:07 +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
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<mailto:dgilbert at redhat.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 7:40 PM
To: Montes, Julio <julio.montes at intel.com<mailto:julio.montes at intel.com>>; pbonzini at redhat.com<mailto:pbonzini at redhat.com>
Cc: kata-dev at lists.katacontainers.io<mailto:kata-dev at lists.katacontainers.io>
Subject: Re: [kata-dev] QEMU 4 and QEMU-lite

* Montes, Julio (julio.montes at intel.com<mailto: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<mailto: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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.katacontainers.io/pipermail/kata-dev/attachments/20190529/ab246e8c/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: p2.png
Type: image/png
Size: 80104 bytes
Desc: p2.png
URL: <http://lists.katacontainers.io/pipermail/kata-dev/attachments/20190529/ab246e8c/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: p1.png
Type: image/png
Size: 47885 bytes
Desc: p1.png
URL: <http://lists.katacontainers.io/pipermail/kata-dev/attachments/20190529/ab246e8c/attachment-0003.png>