Kudos to XCP-ng team!

The incorrect clock results mean that Xen isn't in charge of frequency scaling management. Set the CPU Power Management to Performance Per Watt (OS) and run the previous xenpm, this time with a watch for real-time:

# watch 'xenpm start 1 | grep -i "avg freq"'

Start a VM boot storm (or a stress test inside one or more VMs) in order to generate some CPU load.

@cyrus104 said in XOA guest tools error:

Thoughts on some ways to fix this?

The problem was semantics... The command you really wanted was xe vm-cd-eject. Issuing a xe vm-cd-remove not only removes the .ISO but also the DVD-drive. In this case, you must recreate the device. It's possible to do so through the CLI, but it can be a bit tricky because it's needed to identify a free device position... IMHO the easier way is via XCP-ng Center:

Image from https://support.citrix.com/article/CTX132411:

@stormi Yes, after trying to save the changes, an error banner appeared with the message "Your account has been flagged". It was indeed a policy for new accounts, according to the github support team. I'll try again, thanks!

@stormi I've just created a github account but it was flagged right after trying to edit the wiki

Is there some sort of permission?

FYI, I couldn't edit the wiki without an account. The edit button only appears after signed in.

@enes-selcuk

This is one of our production servers with the CPU Power Management config I posted earlier. It's a Dell R730 - Xeon E5-2630v3 @ 2.40 Ghz. As you can see, some cores are boosting to 3.0-3.1GHz. The maximum for this CPU model is 3.2 GHz:

  Avg freq	2737140	KHz
  Avg freq	2737140	KHz
  Avg freq	2689120	KHz
  Avg freq	2665110	KHz
  Avg freq	2737140	KHz
  Avg freq	3097290	KHz
  Avg freq	3073280	KHz
  Avg freq	2713130	KHz
  Avg freq	2665110	KHz
  Avg freq	2641100	KHz
  Avg freq	2761150	KHz
  Avg freq	2665110	KHz
  Avg freq	2689120	KHz
  Avg freq	2617090	KHz
  Avg freq	2881200	KHz
  Avg freq	2785160	KHz
  Avg freq	2641100	KHz
  Avg freq	2713130	KHz
  Avg freq	2689120	KHz
  Avg freq	2689120	KHz
  Avg freq	2689120	KHz
  Avg freq	2785160	KHz
  Avg freq	2833180	KHz
  Avg freq	2761150	KHz
  Avg freq	2761150	KHz
  Avg freq	2905210	KHz
  Avg freq	2713130	KHz
  Avg freq	3025260	KHz
  Avg freq	2761150	KHz
  Avg freq	2713130	KHz
  Avg freq	2833180	KHz
  Avg freq	2617090	KHz

The incorrect clock results mean that Xen isn't in charge of frequency scaling management. Set the CPU Power Management to Performance Per Watt (OS) and run the previous xenpm, this time with a watch for real-time:

# watch 'xenpm start 1 | grep -i "avg freq"'

Start a VM boot storm (or a stress test inside one or more VMs) in order to generate some CPU load.

@enes-selcuk

What's the output of:

# xenpm start 1 | grep -i "avg freq"

@Silencer80

No, my systems are Intel-based but might work also for AMD processors. The only caveat is whether AMD fixed the C-STATES/MWAIT bug causing spontaneous reboots on the 1st gen architecture. Since ROME is a new arch, maybe it's not affected. The only way to be sure is enabling C-STATES and keep an eye on it.

That Citrix KB is my go-to reference about Xen power management. Very good article.

Kudos to XCP-ng team!

@Silencer80

Before installing Xen, the first thing I change is the BIOS power profile settings. In my experience, it works pretty well with Performance and OS Control. For production, my choice is the latter because it gives to Xen the core frequency scaling management (boost) and saves energy when there's a low demand after hours.

@nmym said in AMD Eypc 7402P ?:

When I set this to ondemand, my network speed drops. It's somehow ironic as I have the demand for this speed, but the process does not demand, resulting in slower network transfer

For benchmark purposes, try reducing the dom0 #vcpus (4 is good value IMHO for the tests). Since it's a high core count processor, a 8+ dom0 cores is good for hosting 100+ VMs but it might distort benchmark results because the packet processing will be spread across all dom0 cores. With the CPU governor set to ondemand the more cores you have the less will be the need to boost. This behavior doesn't occur in performance due to the cores being at the base clock minimum frequency.

I'm here. Alive n' kickin'