Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-13 Thread Rik van Riel
Andi Kleen wrote: hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have "stolen cycles" that way... I wonder if this concept can be used for that as well... I don't see the point, frankly. In a virtualized

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-13 Thread Rik van Riel
Andi Kleen wrote: hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have stolen cycles that way... I wonder if this concept can be used for that as well... I don't see the point, frankly. In a virtualized

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Andi Kleen
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 01:45:52PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 13:25 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large > > > degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have "stolen > > > cycles" that way... I

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 13:25 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large > > degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have "stolen > > cycles" that way... I wonder if this concept can be used for that as > > well... > > I don't

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Andi Kleen
> hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large > degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have "stolen > cycles" that way... I wonder if this concept can be used for that as > well... If you mean it for the real time clock: Doesn't make sense then because

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Zachary Amsden
Arjan van de Ven wrote: On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 16:11 +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 20:54 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: Rusty Russell wrote: Indeed, I'm expecting to push lguest this week, and this code will effect me, so I'd like to see this in a -mm soon...

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 16:11 +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 20:54 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: > > Rusty Russell wrote: > > > Indeed, I'm expecting to push lguest this week, and this code will > > > effect me, so I'd like to see this in a -mm soon... > > > > Yes, I took a look

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 16:11 +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 20:54 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: Rusty Russell wrote: Indeed, I'm expecting to push lguest this week, and this code will effect me, so I'd like to see this in a -mm soon... Yes, I took a look at the

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Zachary Amsden
Arjan van de Ven wrote: On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 16:11 +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 20:54 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: Rusty Russell wrote: Indeed, I'm expecting to push lguest this week, and this code will effect me, so I'd like to see this in a -mm soon...

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Andi Kleen
hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have stolen cycles that way... I wonder if this concept can be used for that as well... If you mean it for the real time clock: Doesn't make sense then because Linux

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 13:25 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have stolen cycles that way... I wonder if this concept can be used for that as well... I don't see the

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-06 Thread Andi Kleen
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 01:45:52PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 13:25 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have stolen cycles that way... I wonder if

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Stephen Rothwell
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:11:16 +1100 Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Patches welcome (but note that I've started a new lguest patch repo at > http://lguest.kernel.org/patches). Presumably you mean lguest.ozlabs.org ... -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Rusty Russell
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 20:54 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: > Rusty Russell wrote: > > Indeed, I'm expecting to push lguest this week, and this code will > > effect me, so I'd like to see this in a -mm soon... > > Yes, I took a look at the lguest changes today and I think these won't > generate

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Zachary Amsden
Rusty Russell wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 19:52 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: A bunch of VMI and paravirt-ops bugfixes for upstream. Also, fix the timer code to work for 2.6.21, which had a number of changes. These should mostly be non-controversial and beneficial to all the paravirt-ops

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Rusty Russell
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 19:52 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: > A bunch of VMI and paravirt-ops bugfixes for upstream. Also, fix the > timer code to work for 2.6.21, which had a number of changes. > > These should mostly be non-controversial and beneficial to all the > paravirt-ops work. Indeed, I'm

[PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Zachary Amsden
A bunch of VMI and paravirt-ops bugfixes for upstream. Also, fix the timer code to work for 2.6.21, which had a number of changes. These should mostly be non-controversial and beneficial to all the paravirt-ops work. Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

[PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Zachary Amsden
A bunch of VMI and paravirt-ops bugfixes for upstream. Also, fix the timer code to work for 2.6.21, which had a number of changes. These should mostly be non-controversial and beneficial to all the paravirt-ops work. Zach [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Rusty Russell
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 19:52 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: A bunch of VMI and paravirt-ops bugfixes for upstream. Also, fix the timer code to work for 2.6.21, which had a number of changes. These should mostly be non-controversial and beneficial to all the paravirt-ops work. Indeed, I'm

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Zachary Amsden
Rusty Russell wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 19:52 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: A bunch of VMI and paravirt-ops bugfixes for upstream. Also, fix the timer code to work for 2.6.21, which had a number of changes. These should mostly be non-controversial and beneficial to all the paravirt-ops

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Rusty Russell
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 20:54 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: Rusty Russell wrote: Indeed, I'm expecting to push lguest this week, and this code will effect me, so I'd like to see this in a -mm soon... Yes, I took a look at the lguest changes today and I think these won't generate conflicts,

Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

2007-02-05 Thread Stephen Rothwell
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:11:16 +1100 Rusty Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Patches welcome (but note that I've started a new lguest patch repo at http://lguest.kernel.org/patches). Presumably you mean lguest.ozlabs.org ... -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell[EMAIL PROTECTED]