Having noticed that VMLOAD alone is about as fast as a single of the
involved WRMSRs, I thought it might be a reasonable idea to also use it
for PV. Measurements, however, have shown that an actual improvement can
be achieved only with an early prefetch of the VMCB (thanks to Andrew
for suggesting
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 04:14:11AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Having noticed that VMLOAD alone is about as fast as a single of the
> involved WRMSRs, I thought it might be a reasonable idea to also use it
> for PV. Measurements, however, have shown that an actual improvement can
> be achieved only
>>> On 17.08.18 at 00:04, wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 04:14:11AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Having noticed that VMLOAD alone is about as fast as a single of the
>> involved WRMSRs, I thought it might be a reasonable idea to also use it
>> for PV. Measurements, however, have shown that an ac
On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 01:33:43AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 17.08.18 at 00:04, wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 04:14:11AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> Having noticed that VMLOAD alone is about as fast as a single of the
> >> involved WRMSRs, I thought it might be a reasonable idea t
>>> On 17.08.18 at 16:55, wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 01:33:43AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 17.08.18 at 00:04, wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 04:14:11AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> Having noticed that VMLOAD alone is about as fast as a single of the
>> >> involved WRMSRs, I
