On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 01:48:17PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 11:31:06AM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 07:47:48AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 12:19:34PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>> > >
>> > >I tend to f
On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 11:31:06AM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 07:47:48AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 12:19:34PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > >On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 08:21:40AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Thank
On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 07:47:48AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 12:19:34PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 08:21:40AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> >> >On Mon, Jul 14,
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 12:19:34PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 08:21:40AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>> >On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 07:11:06AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 08:21:40AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 07:11:06AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 05:33:43PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> >> >On 10.07.25 18:11,
On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 05:37:51PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 07:11:06AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 05:33:43PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> >On 10.07.25 18:11, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
>
>Tested on a VM which this could be tried on.
>
On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 07:11:06AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 05:33:43PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> >On 10.07.25 18:11, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> >> We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
> >> benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This is
On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 05:33:43PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>On 10.07.25 18:11, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
>> We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
>> benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This issue appeared with a patch
>> that addresses security issue XSA-391 (see Fixe
On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 07:41:02AM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 01:05:47PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 04:11:15PM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> >> We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
> >> benchmarking the
On 10.07.25 18:11, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This issue appeared with a patch
that addresses security issue XSA-391 (see Fixes below). On an iperf
benchmark, spurious interrupts can represent up t
On 10.07.25 18:11, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This issue appeared with a patch
that addresses security issue XSA-391 (see Fixes below). On an iperf
benchmark, spurious interrupts can represent up t
On 11.07.25 11:29, Teddy Astie wrote:
You also probably want to send this to linux kernel mailing list too.
Le 10/07/2025 à 18:14, Anthoine Bourgeois a écrit :
We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This issue appeared with a patch
t
You also probably want to send this to linux kernel mailing list too.
Le 10/07/2025 à 18:14, Anthoine Bourgeois a écrit :
> We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
> benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This issue appeared with a patch
> that addresses security issue XSA-39
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 01:05:47PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 04:11:15PM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
>> We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
>> benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This issue appeared with a patch
>> that addresses securi
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 04:11:15PM +, Anthoine Bourgeois wrote:
> We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
> benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This issue appeared with a patch
> that addresses security issue XSA-391 (see Fixes below). On an iperf
> benchmark, spurious
We found at Vates that there are lot of spurious interrupts when
benchmarking the PV drivers of Xen. This issue appeared with a patch
that addresses security issue XSA-391 (see Fixes below). On an iperf
benchmark, spurious interrupts can represent up to 50% of the
interrupts.
Spurious interrupts a
16 matches
Mail list logo