On 01/22/2011 01:14 AM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
Also it may be possible for the pv-ticketlocks to track owning vcpu and make use of a yield-to interface as further optimization to avoid the "others-get-more-time" problem, but Peterz rightly pointed that PI would be a better solution there than yield-to. So overall IMO kvm_vcpu_on_spin+yield_to could be the best solution for unmodified guests, while paravirtualized ticketlocks + some sort of PI would be a better solution where we have the luxury of modifying guest sources!
Agreed, for unmodified guests (which is what people will mostly be running for the next couple of years), we have little choice but to use PLE + kvm_vcpu_on_spin + yield_to. The main question that remains is whether the PV ticketlocks are a large enough improvement to also merge those. I expect they will be, and we'll see so in the benchmark numbers. -- All rights reversed -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
