On Mon, 10/14 02:18, Wangshen (Peter) wrote:
>
>
> on Sunday, October 13, 2013 9:27 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Il 12/10/2013 08:09, Soumendu Satapathy (sosatapa) ha scritto:
> > > Do we have an equivalent of vmware SIOC like feature in KVM?
> >
> > Yes, you have two choices:
> >
> > 1) use cg
on Sunday, October 13, 2013 9:27 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 12/10/2013 08:09, Soumendu Satapathy (sosatapa) ha scritto:
> > Do we have an equivalent of vmware SIOC like feature in KVM?
>
> Yes, you have two choices:
>
> 1) use cgroups to throttle I/O at the level of the host disk (i.e.
> mul
This is a followup to RFC posted by Shirley Ma on 22 March 2012 :
NUMA aware scheduling per vhost thread patch [1]. This patch is against
3.12-rc4.
This is a step-down from the previous version in the sense that
this patch utilizes the workqueue mechanism instead of creating per-cpu
vhost threads,
Signed-off-by: Bandan Das
---
drivers/vhost/net.c | 25 +++
drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 115 +++---
drivers/vhost/vhost.h | 6 +++
3 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c
index
On Mon, 10/14 02:13, Andrey Korolyov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> By the way, is there plans to enhance qemu I/O throttling to able to
> swallow peaks or to apply various disciplines? Current one-second flat
> discipline seemingly is not enough for uneven workloads especially
> when there is no alternative
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 11:50:37AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 10/12/13 11:09 AM, P?ter Szab? wrote:
> >I'm using afdf92030c7c43b0f9b32b7edbe07ac3b13780f1 from
> >git://github.com/penberg/linux-kvm.git and Linux kernel 3.2.51:
> >
> >config-3.2.51 (42 KB)
> >https://mega.co.nz/#!hgxB1TDJ!SdbX-j
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 10:01:42AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 10/12/2013 05:49 AM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> >Hi Peter,
> >
> >(Adding bunch of CCs.)
> >
> >On 10/12/13 11:05 AM, P?ter Szab? wrote:
> >>First, thank you very much for writing lkvm, it's awesome, and very
> >>easy to set up.
> >>
> >>
Hello,
By the way, is there plans to enhance qemu I/O throttling to able to
swallow peaks or to apply various disciplines? Current one-second flat
discipline seemingly is not enough for uneven workloads especially
when there is no alternative like cgroups for nbd usage.
Thanks!
On Sun, Oct 13, 2
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 08:49:28PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 06:41:22PM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 12:31:29PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 10:36:36AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 06:41:22PM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 12:31:29PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 10:36:36AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 02:22:27PM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > > The current KVM cod
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 12:31:29PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 10:36:36AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 02:22:27PM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > The current KVM code relies on a number of definitions to exist for each
> > > architecture:
On Sun, 2013-10-13 at 18:52 +0300, Sami wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> I'm getting this error:
>
> root@Ubuntu-Server:/# sudo /sbin/modprobe kvm-intel
> FATAL: Error inserting kvm_intel
> (/lib/modules/3.5.0-41-generic/kernel/arch/x86/kvm/kvm-intel.ko):
> Operation not supported
>
> CPU: Intel Pentium 4
Hello!
I'm getting this error:
root@Ubuntu-Server:/# sudo /sbin/modprobe kvm-intel
FATAL: Error inserting kvm_intel
(/lib/modules/3.5.0-41-generic/kernel/arch/x86/kvm/kvm-intel.ko):
Operation not supported
CPU: Intel Pentium 4 2,60GHz (If that matters)
Please advice.
--
To unsubscribe from th
On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 17:47 +0200, Antonios Motakis wrote:
> In vfio_iommu_type1.c there is a bug in vfio_dma_do_map, when checking
> that pages are not already mapped. Since the check is being done in a
> for loop nested within the main loop, breaking out of it does not create
> the intended behav
Il 12/10/2013 08:09, Soumendu Satapathy (sosatapa) ha scritto:
> Do we have an equivalent of vmware SIOC like feature in KVM?
Yes, you have two choices:
1) use cgroups to throttle I/O at the level of the host disk (i.e.
multiple virtual disks stored on the same disk share the limit). If
you're u
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 10:36:36AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 02:22:27PM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > The current KVM code relies on a number of definitions to exist for each
> > architecture:
> > KVM_HPAGE_GFN_SHIFT
> > KVM_NR_HPAGE_SIZES
> > KVM_PAGES_PER
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:54:59PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> index 33d52b8..1e8fced 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> @@ -17,9 +17,12 @@
> #def
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:54:59PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> From: Dominik Dingel
>
> This patch enables async page faults for s390 kvm guests.
> It provides the userspace API to enable, disable and disable_wait this
> feature.
> By providing disable and disable_wait, the userspace c
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 11:48:03AM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:54:58PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > From: Dominik Dingel
> >
> > kvm_clear_async_pf_completion get an additional flag to either cancel
> > outstanding
> > work or wait for oustanding work to be
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:54:58PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> From: Dominik Dingel
>
> kvm_clear_async_pf_completion get an additional flag to either cancel
> outstanding
> work or wait for oustanding work to be finished, x86 currentlx cancels all
> work.
>
I do not see why x86 would
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:54:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> From: Jens Freimann
>
> This patch adds a floating irq controller as a kvm_device.
> It will be necessary for migration of floating interrupts as well
> as for hardening the reset code by allowing user space to explicitly
>
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 01:38:57PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> On 10/09/2013 02:33 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> >We use jump label to enable pv-spinlock. With the changes in
> >(442e0973e927 Merge branch 'x86/jumplabel'), the jump label behaviour has
> >changed
> >that would result in evntual
On 10/09/2013 02:33 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
We use jump label to enable pv-spinlock. With the changes in
(442e0973e927 Merge branch 'x86/jumplabel'), the jump label behaviour has
changed
that would result in evntual hang of the VM since we would end up in a situation
where slowpath locks woul
23 matches
Mail list logo