Avi Kivity wrote:
> Laurent Vivier wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> The normal user/system accounting has the same issue, no? Whereever we
>>> happen to land (kernel or user) gets the whole tick.
>>>
>>> So I think it is okay to have the same limitation for guest time.
>>>
>>>
>>
Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>
>> Where did CONFIG_GUEST_ACCOUNTING go?
>>
>>
>
> Lost in the sea ...
>
> Actually, I thought this modification is not enough expensive (in time and
> space) to justify a CONFIG_*. But if you think so I can add this in
> init/Kconfig.
>
>
The difference between "
Luca Tettamanti wrote:
> In order to reactivate the CPU after the reset. When the guest reboots I
> get an unhandled vm exit:
>
> unhandled vm exit: 0x8021
> rax rbx rcx rdx
> 0600
> rsi rdi rsp 0
Hi, all,
This is today's KVM test result against kvm.git
a843332b0445c9d60e4c9bda965b10cbe632a088 and kvm-userspace.git
356c9ff52b05e2d0f2b2eee9f861ad7c3ab3babd.
Host crash issue still exists on latest KVM, even boot one linux guest
will cause host to crash, so most our tests failed.
I have uploa
Aug 20 - Aug 24: With every purchase of our MD List comes completely free! a
Directory for Dentists, Nursing Homes and Hospitals
Licensed MDs in the USA
788,933 in total 17,400 emails
MDs in many different specialties
Over a dozen sortable fields
Lowered Price - $358
*** BONUS: Get
Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
> Hi, all,
> This is today's KVM test result against kvm.git
> a843332b0445c9d60e4c9bda965b10cbe632a088 and kvm-userspace.git
> 356c9ff52b05e2d0f2b2eee9f861ad7c3ab3babd.
>
> Host crash issue still exists on latest KVM, even boot one linux guest
> will cause host to crash, so mo
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
>> Hi, all,
>> This is today's KVM test result against kvm.git
>> a843332b0445c9d60e4c9bda965b10cbe632a088 and kvm-userspace.git
>> 356c9ff52b05e2d0f2b2eee9f861ad7c3ab3babd.
>>
>> Host crash issue still exists on latest KVM, even boot one linux guest
>> will
>> Sorry, I forgot about it since all works well here. Will try to
>> reproduce.
>>
>
>Now fixed and pushed (200b412d5f84907f2de0e27b95e70493d0741fa3 in
>kvm-userspace.git). I didn't see the issue because I usually use
>--with-patched-kernel and run kvm.git directly.
[Yunfeng] Thank you very much
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Paul Brook wrote:
>>> Yes, good thinking, but this should only be done if it actually impacts
>>> something. Reducing overhead from 0.1% to 0.05% is not worthwhile
>>> if it
>>> introduces extra complexity.
>>>
>>
>>
>> If the overhead is that small, why are we touching t
The aim of these four patches is to introduce Virtual Machine time accounting.
_Ingo_, as these patches modify files of the scheduler, could you have a look to
them, please ?
[PATCH 1/4] as recent CPUs introduce a third running state, after "user" and
"system", we need a new field, "guest", in cp
[PATCH 3/4] modify account_system_time() to add cputime to cpustat->guest if we
are running a VCPU. We add this cputime to cpustat->user instead of
cpustat->system because this part of KVM code is in fact user code although it
is executed in the kernel. We duplicate VCPU time between guest and use
[PATCH 1/4] as recent CPUs introduce a third running state, after "user" and
"system", we need a new field, "guest", in cpustat to store the time used by
the CPU to run virtual CPU. Modify /proc/stat to display this new field.
Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
- [EM
[PATCH 4/4] Modify KVM to update guest time accounting.
Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
"Software is hard" - Donald Knuth
Index: kvm/drivers/kvm/kvm.h
===
[PATCH 2/4] like for cpustat, introduce the "gtime" (guest time of the task) and
"cgtime" (guest time of the task children) fields for the
tasks. Modify signal_struct and task_struct. Modify /proc//stat to display
these new fields.
Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Laurent Vivier wrote:
> [PATCH 4/4] Modify KVM to update guest time accounting.
>
>
> Index: kvm/drivers/kvm/kvm.h
> ===
> --- kvm.orig/drivers/kvm/kvm.h2007-08-20 13:23:53.0 +0200
> +++ kvm/drivers/kvm/kvm.h 20
Laurent Vivier wrote:
> The aim of these four patches is to introduce Virtual Machine time accounting.
>
1-3 look good to me. 4 needs minor edits...
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
-
This
Laurent> The aim of these four patches is to introduce Virtual Machine
Laurent> time accounting.
So what does this buy us? What increased functionality?
Laurent> [PATCH 1/4] as recent CPUs introduce a third running state,
Laurent> after "user" and "system", we need a new field, "guest", in
L
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Laurent Vivier wrote:
>> [PATCH 4/4] Modify KVM to update guest time accounting.
>>
>>
>
>> Index: kvm/drivers/kvm/kvm.h
>> ===
>> --- kvm.orig/drivers/kvm/kvm.h2007-08-20 13:23:53.0 +0200
>> +++ kvm
On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 12:24 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> > 2) We either need huge descriptors or some chaining mechanism to
> > handle scatter-gather.
> >
>
> Or, my preference, have a small sglist in the descriptor;
Define "small" ;)
There a certainly pa
Am Montag, 20. August 2007 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
> Index: kvm/fs/proc/array.c
> ===
> --- kvm.orig/fs/proc/array.c2007-08-20 11:11:30.0 +0200
> +++ kvm/fs/proc/array.c 2007-08-20 13:04:03.0 +0200
Just a heads up,
>> > 2) We either need huge descriptors or some chaining
>mechanism to
>> > handle scatter-gather.
>> >
>>
>> Or, my preference, have a small sglist in the descriptor;
>
>
>Define "small" ;)
>
>There a certainly patterns that cannot/will-not take advantage of SG
>(for instance, your
Laurent Vivier wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>
>>> [PATCH 4/4] Modify KVM to update guest time accounting.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Index: kvm/drivers/kvm/kvm.h
>>> ===
>>> --- kvm.orig/drivers/kvm/kvm
Dor Laor wrote:
2) We either need huge descriptors or some chaining
>> mechanism to
>>
handle scatter-gather.
>>> Or, my preference, have a small sglist in the descriptor;
>>>
>> Define "small" ;)
>>
>> There a certainly pattern
Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>>
>>>
>> Or, my preference, have a small sglist in the descriptor;
>>
>
>
> Define "small" ;)
>
4.
> There a certainly patterns that cannot/will-not take advantage of SG
> (for instance, your typical network rx path), and therefore the sg
> entries are w
Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am Montag, 20. August 2007 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
>> Index: kvm/fs/proc/array.c
>> ===
>> --- kvm.orig/fs/proc/array.c2007-08-20 11:11:30.0 +0200
>> +++ kvm/fs/proc/array.c 2007-08-20 13:04:0
On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 07:03 -0700, Dor Laor wrote:
> >> > 2) We either need huge descriptors or some chaining
> >mechanism to
> >> > handle scatter-gather.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Or, my preference, have a small sglist in the descriptor;
> >
> >
> >Define "small" ;)
> >
> >There a certainl
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Laurent Vivier wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>
>>> Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>>
[PATCH 4/4] Modify KVM to update guest time accounting.
Index: kvm/drivers/kvm/kvm.h
===
>>
Hi John,
John Stoffel wrote:
>
> Laurent> The aim of these four patches is to introduce Virtual Machine
> Laurent> time accounting.
>
> So what does this buy us? What increased functionality?
>
functionnalities:
- allow to measure time spent by a CPU in a virtual CPU.
- allow to display in
Hi all,
Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.23-rc3
with patches available.
Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc.
http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions
List of Aces
NameRegressions fixed since 21-Jun-2007
Adrian Bunk9
Laurent Vivier wrote:
> functionnalities:
>
> - allow to measure time spent by a CPU in a virtual CPU.
> - allow to display in /proc/state this value by CPU
> - allow to display in /proc//state this value by process
> - allow KVM to use these 3 previous functionnalities
>
So, currently time spe
> Laurent Vivier wrote:
> functionnalities:
>
> > - allow to measure time spent by a CPU in a virtual CPU.
> > - allow to display in /proc/state this value by CPU
> > - allow to display in /proc//state this value by process
> > - allow KVM to use these 3 previous functionnalities
> >
>
> So, curre
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=EXMT.PK
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Downlo
> by doing this at kernel level, we can:
> - measure exactly the guest time,
> - move this part of system time to user time (as you think it should be
> user time),
> - have consistency between system, user and guest time,
> - report values in /proc/state and /proc//state, at system wide level
>
>
Il Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 10:31:26PM +0300, Avi Kivity ha scritto:
> Luca wrote:
> > On 8/19/07, Luca Tettamanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> +static uint64_t qemu_next_deadline(void) {
> >> +uint64_t nearest_delta_us = ULLONG_MAX;
> >> +uint64_t vmdelta_us;
> >>
> >
> > Hum,
There are cases[1] where you want to be able to pass more ldflags to
qemu's configure. This lets you set LDFLAGS to accomplish that
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jeremy
[1] Such as with the new build-id support in binutils so that you can
pass --build-id to the linker while sti
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Luca Tettamanti wrote:
> Il Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 10:31:26PM +0300, Avi Kivity ha scritto:
>> Luca wrote:
>>> On 8/19/07, Luca Tettamanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
+static uint64_t qemu_next_deadline(void) {
+uint64_t nearest_delta_us = ULLONG_MAX;
+
On 8/20/07, malc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Luca Tettamanti wrote:
>
> > Il Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 10:31:26PM +0300, Avi Kivity ha scritto:
> >> Luca wrote:
> >>> On 8/19/07, Luca Tettamanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> +static uint64_t qemu_next_deadline(void) {
> >
On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 17:12 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Dor Laor wrote:
> > Using Rusty's code there is no waste.
> > Each descriptor has a flag (head|next). Next flag stands for pointer to
> > the
> > next descriptor with u32 next index. So the waste is 4 bytes.
> > Sg descriptors are chained on th
On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 09:50 -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 17:43 +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Well, for cache reasons you should really try to avoid having both sides
> > write to the same data. Hence two separate cache-aligned regions is
> > better than one region and a
On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 09:13 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Laurent Vivier wrote:
> > functionnalities:
> >
> > - allow to measure time spent by a CPU in a virtual CPU.
> > - allow to display in /proc/state this value by CPU
> > - allow to display in /proc//state this value by process
> > - all
This patch enabled TPR shadow of VMX on CR8 access. 64bit Windows using
CR8
access TPR frequently. The TPR shadow can improve the performance of
access
TPR by not causing vmexit.
Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Notice: This patch based on the rebased lapic5, for the current lapic5
i
After introducing TPR shadow, many TPR change won't cause vmexit, so the
present method of updating PPR can't catch it. Though we can also update
PPR
everytime when we want to read PPR, it's somehow ugly.
Because there are only two places need reading PPR, and PPR is
read-only, we
do it in more cl
42 matches
Mail list logo
