> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2023 at 10:06 AM
> From: "Martin Kletzander" <mkletzan(a)redhat.com>
> To: "daggs" <daggs(a)gmx.com>
> Cc: users(a)lists.libvirt.org
> Subject: Re: hdd kills vm
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 05:58:32PM +0100, daggs wrote:
> >> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 9:50 AM
> >> From: "Martin Kletzander" <mkletzan(a)redhat.com>
> >> To: "daggs" <daggs(a)gmx.com>
> >> Cc: libvir-list(a)redhat.com
> >> Subject: Re: hdd kills vm
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 03:06:55PM +0200, daggs wrote:
> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:28 PM
> >> >> From: "Martin Kletzander" <mkletzan(a)redhat.com>
> >> >> To: "daggs" <daggs(a)gmx.com>
> >> >> Cc: libvir-list(a)redhat.com
> >> >> Subject: Re: hdd kills vm
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 04:59:08PM +0200, daggs wrote:
> >> >> >Greetings Martin,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:37 PM
> >> >> >> From: "Martin Kletzander"
<mkletzan(a)redhat.com>
> >> >> >> To: "daggs" <daggs(a)gmx.com>
> >> >> >> Cc: libvir-list(a)redhat.com
> >> >> >> Subject: Re: hdd kills vm
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 02:42:38PM +0200, daggs wrote:
> >> >> >> >Greetings,
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >I have a windows 11 vm running on my Gentoo using
libvirt (9.8.0) + qemu (8.1.2), I'm passing almost all available resources to the vm
> >> >> >> >(all 16 cpus, 31 out of 32 GB, nVidia gpu is pt), but
the performance is not good, system lags, takes long time to boot.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> There are couple of things that stand out to me in your
setup and I'll
> >> >> >> assume the host has one NUMA node with 8 cores, each with
2 threads as,
> >> >> >> just like you set it up in the guest XML.
> >> >> >thats correct, see:
> >> >> >$ lscpu | grep -i numa
> >> >> >NUMA node(s): 1
> >> >> >NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-15
> >> >> >
> >> >> >however:
> >> >> >$ dmesg | grep -i numa
> >> >> >[ 0.003783] No NUMA configuration found
> >> >> >
> >> >> >can that be the reason?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> no, this is fine, 1 NUMA node is not a NUMA, technically, so
that's
> >> >> perfectly fine.
> >> >thanks for clarifying it for me
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> * When you give the guest all the CPUs the host has there
is nothing
> >> >> >> left to run the host tasks. You might think that there
"isn't
> >> >> >> anything running", but there is, if only your init
system, the kernel
> >> >> >> and the QEMU which is emulating the guest. This is
definitely one of
> >> >> >> the bottlenecks.
> >> >> >I've tried with 12 out of 16, same behavior.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> * The pinning of vCPUs to CPUs is half-suspicious. If you
are trying to
> >> >> >> make vCPU 0 and 1 be threads on the same core and on
the host the
> >> >> >> threads are represented as CPUs 0 and 8, then
that's fine. If that is
> >> >> >> just copy-pasted from somewhere, then it might not
reflect the current
> >> >> >> situation and can be source of many scheduling issues
(even once the
> >> >> >> above is dealt with).
> >> >> >I found a site that does it for you, if it is wrong, can you
point me to a place I can read about it?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Just check what the topology is on the host and try to match it
with the
> >> >> guest one. If in doubt, then try it without the pinning.
> >> >I can try to play with it, what I don't know is what should be the
mapping logic?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Threads on the same core in the guest should map to threads on the same
> >> core in the host. Since there is no NUMA that should be enough to get
> >> the best performance. But even misconfiguration of this will not
> >> introduce lags in the system if it has 8 CPUs. So that's definitely
not
> >> the root cause of the main problem, it just might be suboptimal.
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> * I also seem to recall that Windows had some issues with
systems that
> >> >> >> have too many cores. I'm not sure whether that was
an issue with an
> >> >> >> edition difference or just with some older versions, or
if it just did
> >> >> >> not show up in the task manager, but there was
something that was
> >> >> >> fixed by using either more sockets or cores in the
topology. This is
> >> >> >> probably not the issue for you though.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >after trying a few ways to fix it, I've concluded
that the issue might be related to the why the hdd is defined at the vm level.
> >> >> >> >here is the xml:
https://bpa.st/MYTA
> >> >> >> >I assume that the hdd sits on the sata ctrl causing
the issue but I'm not sure what is the proper way to fix it, any ideas?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It looks like your disk is on SATA, but I don't see
why that would be an
> >> >> >> issue. Passing the block device to QEMU as VirtIO
shouldn't cause that
> >> >> >> much of a difference. Try measuring the speed of the disk
on the host
> >> >> >> and then in the VM maybe. Is that SSD or NVMe? I presume
that's not
> >> >> >> spinning rust, is it.
> >> >> >as seen, I have 3 drives, 2 cdroms as sata and one hdd pt as
virtio, I read somewhere that if the controller of the virtio
> >> >> >device is sata, than it doesn't uses the virtio optimally.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well it _might_ be slightly more beneficial to use virtio-scsi or
even
> >> >> <disk type='block' device='lun'>, but I
can't imagine that would make
> >> >> the system lag. I'm not that familiar with the details.
> >> >configure virtio-scsi and sata-scai at the same time?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yes, forgot that, sorry. Try virtio-scsi. You could also go farther
> >> and pass through the LUN or the whole HBA (if you don't need to access
> >> any other disk on it) to the VM. Try the information presented here:
> >>
> >>
https://libvirt.org/formatdomain.html#usb-pci-scsi-devices
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >it is a spindle, nvmes are too expensive where I live, frankly,
I don't need lightning fast boot, the other BM machines running windows on spindle
> >> >> >run it quite fast and they aren't half as fast as this
server
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> That might actually be related. The guest might think it is a
different
> >> >> type of disk and use completely suboptimal scheduling. This might
> >> >> actually be solved by passing it as <disk
device='lun'..., but at this
> >> >> point I'm just guessing.
> >> >I'll look into that, thanks.
> >
> >so bottom line, you suggest the following:
> >1. remove the manual cpu pin, let qemu sort that out.
>
> You might try it, of course pinning it is in the end the better option.
>
> >2. add a virtio scsi controller and connect the os hdd to it
> >3. pass the hss via scsi pt and not dev node
> >4. if I able to do #3, no need to add device='lun' as it won't use
the disk option
> >
>
> First try (3), then you don't need to do anything else and if that
> succeeds you have the superior configuration. If you can pass through
> something that will not remove anything from your host system.
>
> >Dagg.
> >
>
I've decided to first try #3 as yo suggested, based on this output:
$ lsscsi
[0:0:0:0] disk ATA WDC WD1003FZEX-0 1A01 /dev/sda
[1:0:0:0] disk ATA WDC WD10EZEX-08W 1A02 /dev/sdb
[2:0:0:0] disk ATA SAMSUNG HD103SJ 0001 /dev/sdc
[3:0:0:0] disk ATA SAMSUNG HD103SJ 0001 /dev/sdd
[4:0:0:0] disk ATA ST1000DM005 HD10 00E5 /dev/sde
[5:0:0:0] disk ATA WDC WD10EZEX-08W 1A02 /dev/sdf
[6:0:0:0] disk Kingston DataTraveler 3.0 0000 /dev/sdg
[7:0:0:0] cd/dvd TS8XDVDS TRANSCEND 1.02 /dev/sr0
I deduced my data is 0:0:0:0, so I've added this to the file:
I have to trust you here, the link to the XML does not lead anywhere at the moment.
<controller type='scsi' index='0'
model='virtio-scsi'>
<address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00'
slot='0x0c' function='0x0'/>
</controller>
<hostdev mode='subsystem' type='scsi' managed='no'>
With managed='no' you are responsible for detaching and re-attaching the device
for it to be accessible to QEMU. With managed='yes' libvirt can do that for
you. But be really really sure that it is the device you want to plug to the
guest domain.
<source>
<adapter name='scsi_host0'/>
<address bus='0' target='0' unit='0'/>
</source>
<address type='drive' controller='0' bus='0'
target='0' unit='0'/>
</hostdev>
removed the previous config and tried to boot, the vm didn't booted, the qemu log
shows this:
char device redirected to /dev/pts/0 (label charserial0)
2023-11-01T05:00:27.949977Z qemu-system-x86_64: vfio: Cannot reset device 0000:07:00.4,
depends on group 16 which is not owned.
2023-11-01T05:00:28.113089Z qemu-system-x86_64: vfio: Cannot reset device 0000:07:00.4,
depends on group 16 which is not owned.
2023-11-01T05:01:04.511969Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -99 [OTHER]
2023-11-01T05:01:04.511993Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -99 [OTHER]
2023-11-01T17:22:48.200982Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -4 [NO_DEVICE]
2023-11-01T17:22:48.201015Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -4 [NO_DEVICE]
2023-11-01T17:22:48.201025Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -4 [NO_DEVICE]
2023-11-01T17:22:48.201035Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -4 [NO_DEVICE]
libusb_release_interface: -4 [NO_DEVICE]
libusb_release_interface: -4 [NO_DEVICE]
libusb_release_interface: -4 [NO_DEVICE]
libusb_release_interface: -4 [NO_DEVICE]
2023-11-01T20:37:31.246043Z qemu-system-x86_64: vfio: Cannot reset device 0000:07:00.4,
depends on group 16 which is not owned.
2023-11-01T20:37:31.465993Z qemu-system-x86_64: vfio: Cannot reset device 0000:07:00.4,
depends on group 16 which is not owned.
2023-11-01T20:38:07.049875Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -99 [OTHER]
2023-11-01T20:38:07.049910Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -99 [OTHER]
2023-11-01T20:38:07.050063Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_set_interface_alt_setting: -99
[OTHER]
2023-11-01T20:47:47.400781Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -99 [OTHER]
2023-11-01T20:47:47.400804Z qemu-system-x86_64: libusb_release_interface: -99 [OTHER]
2023-11-01 20:47:57.096+0000: shutting down, reason=shutdown
2023-11-01 20:57:37.514+0000: shutting down, reason=failed
if I keep the scsi part but restore the previous device pt, it boots.
any idea why it failed booting?
Dagg.