* Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > >Is this intended for 2.6.20, or would you prefer that we release what we > >have now and hold this off for 2.6.21? > > > > Even though these patches are potentially destabilazing, I'd like them > (and a few other patches) to go into 2.6.20: > > - kvm did not exist in 2.6.19, hence we cannot regress from that > - this patchset is the difference between a working proof of concept and > a generally usable system > - from my testing, it's quite stable
seconded - i have tested the new MMU changes quite extensively and they are converging nicely. It brings down context-switch costs by a factor of 10 and more, even for microbenchmarks: instead of throwing away the full shadow pagetable hiearchy we have worked so hard to construct this patchset allows the intelligent caching of shadow pagetables. The effect is human-visible as well - the system got visibly snappier. (I'd increase the shadow cache pool from the current 256 pages to at least 1024 pages, but that's a detail.) Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/