too bad this only works on linux hosts, but this is what we need for
decent virtualization performance on desktop workloads:
https://github.com/intel/gvt-linux/wiki/GVTg_Setup_Guide
I've got the Linux host ... but it's running a shiny new AMD Ryzen processor
:(
Actually I'm kind of interested in knowing what kind of workload you're running in a Linux guest on a Windows host that needs video performance, since I know you're a developer. I have a Linux-on-Windows setup on my work computer, and I just run Linux in the background and SSH to it.
My son uses a Linux guest on his Windows computer to do video editing in Kdenlive. I have to assume that's an edge case.
I like to run a full Gnome2 desktop on the linux side, and a couple different IDEs depending on what I'm editing: VSCode, or IntelliJ. Also have some inescapable use-cases for Linux browsers (mainly firefox) because web scraping is part of what we do.
It's all a bit sluggish, so I've moved to bare-metal Linux. Windows will be there as a dual-boot in the unlikely event that I ever need to run Excel.
did some googling and installed powertop on this linux laptop. looks like it's going to make a huge difference in battery life.
it's been so damn long since I've run linux on bare metal. forgot how much you had to work to get things running smoothly.
It is not that bad. I think the worst I have had to do was to disable the
discrete Nvidia card on a laptop because I didn't want it to suck so much
battery up.
Powertop and laptop-mode-tools and such do the trick. "n00b friendly" distributions should probably have the functionality on by default, but if you are a hardcore Unix/Linux user they are quick to set. Even dinosaurs like Slackware have power-saving mode scripts.
Powertop and laptop-mode-tools and such do the trick. "n00b friendly" distributions should probably have the functionality on by default, but if you are a hardcore Unix/Linux user they are quick to set. Even dinosaurs like Slackware have power-saving mode scripts.
Powertop and laptop-mode-tools and such do the trick. "n00b friendly"
distributions should probably have the functionality on by default, but
From what I'm hearing, ubuntu occasionally makes a stab at taking recommendations from powertop and making them default, but that was a long time ago (12.04)--this 19.10 version I'm using is not there.
Feh. I want to start deploying Wireguard everywhere, but I'm trying to wait
until it's in the mainline kernel.
well, I've only had 2 crashes in 1 day, separated by a couple of hours, but it was pretty stable before. nothing in my logs. could be hardware-specific. ymmv.
Not a problem for me, as I'm fine with the kernel supplied with the distribution.
It's just a matter of waiting until that kernel (or a bugfixed version of it) arrives as a package.
I am somewhat excited about Wireguard. Its design makes it a lot more useful and a lot easier to deploy than something IPsec based.
It's just a matter of waiting until that kernel (or a bugfixed version of it) arrives as a package.
I am somewhat excited about Wireguard. Its design makes it a lot more useful and a lot easier to deploy than something IPsec based.
I am somewhat excited about Wireguard. Its design makes it a lot more
useful and a lot easier to deploy than something IPsec based.
Why is wireguard so good?
I find IPsec easy enough to deploy, but then I am using OpenBSD's implementation, which I guess is not very common.
I used to feel that way about IPsec, but I realized there are a *lot* of hidden gotchas. You may think you have it set up correctly, but you can have it set up suboptimally for months, with users having intermittent connection drops, before you get all the details right with regards to Dead Peer Detection and that sort of thing.
5.6.5 might be stable enough now, in my testing. It's still early to really say, but this might finally be the first production-quality kernel on Ice Lake.
whelp, it froze up again. maybe spoke too soon. dropping back to 5.6rc7 which seems to still be the most stable of the series. we'll see how that works.
Dare I ask why you aren't using the stock kernel from whatever distribution
you're using? Some special requirement, or just tinkering?
Because it's also got issues. Last time I tried Ubuntu's version of 5.4.x (they track upstream stable, but they don't tell you what X is because they sometimes revert upstream patches), it could not maintain a stable USB-C-->HDMI connection over my multiport adapter without a lot of random dropouts.
So far the most recent, seemingly-stable, least-video-glitchy kernel I've found on this hardware is 5.6rc7, but 5.6.6 just came out this morning so I'll give that a whirl.
Things get a little bit confounded because I've been trying different mesa versions and one of them could be responsible for the video crap and random crashes...
I used to feel that way about IPsec, but I realized there are a *lot*
of hidden gotchas. You may think you have it set up correctly, but you
Back in my production support days I spent way too much time troubleshooting IPSEC setups. It has too many options and is too easy to get wrong. Coincidentally, I got pulled into a troubleshoot this morning that killed half my day, that eventually led us to a botched IPSEC implementation.
WireGuard is simple, much smaller, auditable, and doesn't suffer from death-by-options like IPSEC does. It's worth checking out.
And it seems that WireGuard is now built into the new Ubuntu 20.04 distribution.
I am happy to hear that because I am running Ubuntu at home ... although I run plain Debian on my servers. I intend to use WireGuard to establish a pinned-up VPN between my server environment and my home network.
a lot of the issues that I'm running into may actually be GPU HANG's caused by userspace intel dri drivers (mesa) on ice lake. continuing to troubleshoot and sort through them, it might be related to mesa switching from the 'i965' to the 'iris' driver as their default. it's possible to revert back. we'll see if that turns out to be necessary.
there are some mesa point-releases in the pipeline that might clear things up. ubuntu 20.04 hasn't quite picked that up yet. patience.
at the moment, ubuntu 19.10 was definitely a little more stable. but my 19.10 configuration was in constant flux, and started to exhibit some of the same issues before I migrated to 20.04. so it's hard to nail down exactly where things changed.