I followed the steps in the hyperlink below to start host and guest
docs/infra/common/gicv4_1-vlpi-vsgi.rst · master · Arm Reference Solutions / arm-reference-solutions-docs · GitLab
There are a few problems here：
Firstly,it takes an hour and a half to start host, then a long time to start guest.
Secondly,copying the kernel source code to host ，need several hours.
Thirdly,in order to make vmlinux and kernel source consistent, I need to update the kernel of host, but I cannot compile and install the kernel, the performance of fvp is too poor.
How can I debug virtualization code efficiently？
Hi MikhailMy colleagues have done some testing, on Ubuntu 12.04 and Debian 11, and in both cases the Arm ecosystem model RDN2 (11.20.18) FVP booted successfully in under 30 mins. htop showed the load on the host cores was moderate, and was distributed across all the host cores, and used ~11GB host RAMI'm puzzled why you are seeing "the workload of one core was 100%, while the utilization of other cores was very low". That might point to a memory issue. You said "The RDN2 FVP is deployed on the server. The hardware resources are sufficient, and the memory exceeds 300 GB."Do you mean the hard disk memory is 300GB or DDR memory? Hard disk size isn't so important here, but a minimum of 32GB is recommended for the main DDR memory.On your second point (copying the kernel source code to host), are you trying to do a git clone of Linux kernel to build and install on the host machine? This clone will be limited by the network speeds, and may be slower because the FVP shares the network from host machine over a TAP interface.Hope this helpsStephen
1. The DDR memory on my server is 397GB, not hard disk memory.
2. I run the rsync command to copy the linux kernel to host(fvp) from the machine where RDN2 FVP is deployed without going through an external network.
3. I tested again. During the startup of host kernel and after the completion of the startup of host kernel, only a certain core always has a 100% utilization rate at the same time, while the utilization rate of other cores is very low.
4. There are two hyperlinks below. Following the operation of the first hyperlink, the performance of fvp can work normally, while following the operation of the second hyperlink, the performance of fvp cannot work normally, which is also the reason why I put forward this question. What is the immediate difference between the two? My guess is that buildroot boot generates more workload than busybox boot
docs/infra/common/busybox-boot.rst · master · Arm Reference Solutions / arm-reference-solutions-docs · GitLab
Hi Stephen
Thank you for your help. The above is my reply. You can focus on the difference between the two hyperlinks.
Best Regards,Mikhail
Hi MikhailWe've investigated further and have some more information for you.Fast Models are currently single-threaded for the main simulation. There are a few utility threads, but most of the simulation happens in a single thread, which is why you are seeing high utilization on a single host core.On your second point (copying the kernel source code to host), you should be able to mount the model's filesystem directly from the host, and then directly load e.g. an ext4 image. There's no need to involve the model in any copying process.You asked about the difference between the two GitLab links.For the first one, Busybox boot is comparatively light weight boot as the filesystem is RAM based.For the second one, GIC testing, a distribution-based boot is used which involves multiple things such as PCIe I/O, Disk I/O, and usage of kernel storage stack. Booting of distros is quite slow on models because of these reasons. Using a Debian distribution that is lighter in comparison to Ubuntu may help to some extent.Hope this helpsStephen