Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-11-08 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 12:21:16PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 14/10/2017 01:56, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > Now, I don't know yet what's the best default for a guest that > > has CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCK when it sees a host that supports > > kvm_pv_unhalt. But I'm arguing that it's the guest

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-11-07 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 14/10/2017 01:56, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > Now, I don't know yet what's the best default for a guest that > has CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCK when it sees a host that supports > kvm_pv_unhalt. But I'm arguing that it's the guest > responsibility to choose what to do when it detects such a host, >

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-10-13 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 04:58:23PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 10/13/2017 03:01 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 04:19:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > >> On 10/10/2017 03:41 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 02:07:25PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-10-13 Thread Waiman Long
On 10/13/2017 03:01 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 04:19:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> On 10/10/2017 03:41 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 02:07:25PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: On 10/10/2017 11:50 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> Yes. Another

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-10-13 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 04:19:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 10/10/2017 03:41 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 02:07:25PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > >> On 10/10/2017 11:50 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > Yes. Another possibility is to enable it when there is >1 NUMA

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-10-11 Thread Waiman Long
On 10/10/2017 03:41 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 02:07:25PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> On 10/10/2017 11:50 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: Yes. Another possibility is to enable it when there is >1 NUMA node in the guest. We generally don't do this kind of magic but

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-10-10 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 02:07:25PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 10/10/2017 11:50 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >> Yes. Another possibility is to enable it when there is >1 NUMA node in > >> the guest. We generally don't do this kind of magic but higher layers > >> (oVirt/OpenStack) do. > >

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-10-10 Thread Waiman Long
On 10/10/2017 11:50 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> Yes. Another possibility is to enable it when there is >1 NUMA node in >> the guest. We generally don't do this kind of magic but higher layers >> (oVirt/OpenStack) do. > Can't the guest make this decision, instead of the host? By guest, do you

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default

2017-10-10 Thread Eduardo Habkost
(CCing libvir-list) On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 05:47:44PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 09/10/2017 17:15, Waiman Long wrote: > > On 10/09/2017 09:39 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 06/10/2017 23:52, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >>> This series enables kvm_pv_unhalt by default on pc-*-2.11 and > >>>