Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 10 May 2007 16:51:54 +0200
From:      Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr>
To:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Experiences with 7.0-CURRENT and vmware.
Message-ID:  <f1vbil$juk$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070510125445.GA5460@hub.freebsd.org>
References:  <20070510111326.GA94093@hub.freebsd.org>	<20070510132153.A91312@fledge.watson.org> <20070510125445.GA5460@hub.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig80F24AAB267D3E2D9338AA81
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


>>> I should add that FreeBSD 6, with the same setting, is no better and =
that=20
>>> I need to run ntpdate every 5-10 minutes via crontab in order to keep=
 good=20
>>> time (timekeeping is *really* bad.)  In one instance, i was watching =

>>> "zpool iostat 1" and it appeared like the rows were muching up at a r=
ate=20
>>> of 2 a second for a minute or so. How do I disable TSC timekeeping?  =

>>> (NetBSD has this disabled by default in their kernels.)  Or is there =

>>> somethign else I must do?
>> kern.timecounter.hardware: ACPI-fast
>> kern.timecounter.choice: TSC(800) ACPI-fast(1000) i8254(0) dummy(-1000=
000)

I don't see the beginings of this disucssion, but, if you use TSC=20
timekeeping in guest, and the host is multicore (may also be valid for=20
multi-socket...) running Windows, the Windows scheduler will throw the=20
vmware process around on the CPUs, giving weird measurements in the=20
guest machine. The solution is to bind the vmware-vmx process in the=20
Windows task manager to one CPU only. Using this, I get what appears to=20
be "reasonable" timekeeping (didn't really fiddle with it more, but I=20
run ntpd).

I also run on a very low kern.hz (50), this may or may not make a big=20
difference.

>>> Second, networking. Prior to FreeBSD-7, the driver to use inside vmwa=
re=20
>>> workstation was lnc.  It has worked and contiues to work great.  No=20
>>> problemo. FreeBSD-7 uses the "em" driver.  To put it simply, it sucks=
 in=20
>>> comparison.  When things really get bad I start seeing "em0: watchdog=
=20
>>> timeout" messages on the console.  I looked and I don't see a lnc dri=
ver=20
>>> anywhere.  Is there another alternative (le?) driver that I can use i=
n=20
>>> place of em, if so, how?
>> Has VMware changed what network hardware they emulate, and/or does VMw=
are=20
>> offer options about what virtual hardware to expose?

Recent VMWare versions can emulate either AMD Lance (or its variation,=20
it appears, called vix) or Intel "E1000" card. See, for example, my=20
writing on this: http://ivoras.net/freebsd/vmware.html.

In retrospect, I think I can't really say there's a difference in=20
performance between le and em drivers in VMWare - other slowdowns=20
dominate the results.


--------------enig80F24AAB267D3E2D9338AA81
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGQzGKldnAQVacBcgRAgK8AKCXtGEfQgnhcctKB4OVbJEp1LoLNwCcCVhu
eesy4HIYy4zb4Gzq0hC5JjY=
=U0BM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig80F24AAB267D3E2D9338AA81--




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f1vbil$juk$1>