A minor change to reduce vcpu_put/vcpu_load frequency (still base on
KVM-18). Not sure if you would like to see this?
Signed-off-by: Yaozu Dong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- vmx.old 2007-04-25 20:28:19.0 +0800
+++ vmx.new 2007-04-25 20:28:10.0 +0800
@@ -1945,7 +1945,8 @@
Dong, Eddie wrote:
A minor change to reduce vcpu_put/vcpu_load frequency (still base on
KVM-18). Not sure if you would like to see this?
Signed-off-by: Yaozu Dong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- vmx.old 2007-04-25 20:28:19.0 +0800
+++ vmx.new 2007-04-25 20:28:10.0 +0800
@@
Avi Kivity wrote:
Dong, Eddie wrote:
A minor change to reduce vcpu_put/vcpu_load frequency (still base on
KVM-18). Not sure if you would like to see this?
Signed-off-by: Yaozu Dong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- vmx.old 2007-04-25 20:28:19.0 +0800
+++ vmx.new 2007-04-25
Dong, Eddie wrote:
Here it is.
Applied, thanks.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express
Dong, Eddie wrote:
A minor change to reduce vcpu_put/vcpu_load frequency (still base on
KVM-18). Not sure if you would like to see this?
Signed-off-by: Yaozu Dong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- vmx.old 2007-04-25 20:28:19.0 +0800
+++ vmx.new 2007-04-25 20:28:10.0 +0800
@@
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dong, Eddie wrote:
A minor change to reduce vcpu_put/vcpu_load frequency (still base on
KVM-18). Not sure if you would like to see this?
Signed-off-by: Yaozu Dong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- vmx.old2007-04-25 20:28:19.0 +0800
+++ vmx.new2007-04-25
Anthony Liguori wrote:
This should get moved to kvm_resched() since both VT/SVM would benefit
from this.
I would suggest we just add similar code in SVM side. After we
optimize the MSR/VMCS register save/restore to skip for
those lightweight VM EXIT (handled by KVM). Giving up preemption
Dong, Eddie wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
This should get moved to kvm_resched() since both VT/SVM would benefit
from this.
I would suggest we just add similar code in SVM side. After we
optimize the MSR/VMCS register save/restore to skip for
those lightweight VM EXIT (handled
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dong, Eddie wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
This should get moved to kvm_resched() since both VT/SVM would
benefit from this.
I would suggest we just add similar code in SVM side. After we
optimize the MSR/VMCS register save/restore to skip for
those lightweight
Dong, Eddie wrote:
In this case, IOCTL return to Qemu will trigger scheduling at least.
I think a scheduling change won't happen until the next timer tick.
AFAICT, there's nothing explicit in the ioctl return path that will
result in rescheduling.
I'm not entirely confident in how the
Dong, Eddie wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dong, Eddie wrote:
In this case, IOCTL return to Qemu will trigger scheduling at least.
I think a scheduling change won't happen until the next timer tick.
AFAICT, there's nothing explicit in the ioctl return path that will
result
Dong, Eddie wrote:
Actually I am thinking to totally give up kvm_resched and just let
control return to Qemu which is much clean and provide Qemu
more chance to handle some kind of hardware event such as network
packet arrive etc. Today Qemu is totally depending on heavyweight VM
Exit
to
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dong, Eddie wrote:
In this case, IOCTL return to Qemu will trigger scheduling at least.
I think a scheduling change won't happen until the next timer tick.
AFAICT, there's nothing explicit in the ioctl return path that will
result in rescheduling.
I'm not
Avi Kivity wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dong, Eddie wrote:
In this case, IOCTL return to Qemu will trigger scheduling at least.
I think a scheduling change won't happen until the next timer tick.
AFAICT, there's nothing explicit in the ioctl return path that will
14 matches
Mail list logo
