On 02/09/2010 05:08 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
I'm not saying we should push hpet into the kernel to save userspace
coding effort; there should be an independent reason to do this. But
I don't think threading qemu is going to be anything near easy.
It's certainly not easy but I don't think i
On 02/09/2010 08:38 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/09/2010 04:18 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 02/09/2010 02:52 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
On 09.02.2010, at 07:56, Avi Kivity wrote:
- rcuify/fine-grain qemu locks
And this should be done either way, but is probably not a
short-t
On 02/09/2010 04:18 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 02/09/2010 02:52 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
On 09.02.2010, at 07:56, Avi Kivity wrote:
- rcuify/fine-grain qemu locks
And this should be done either way, but is probably not a short-term
goal.
Indeed. We won't get around th
On 02/09/2010 02:52 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
On 09.02.2010, at 07:56, Avi Kivity wrote:
- rcuify/fine-grain qemu locks
And this should be done either way, but is probably not a short-term goal.
Indeed. We won't get around this longterm as it is a sc
On 02/09/2010 08:56 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/09/2010 03:28 AM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
hpet overhead on large smp guests
I measured hpet consuming about a half a core's worth of cpu on an
idle Windows 2008 R2 64-way guest. This
On 02/09/2010 12:56 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/09/2010 03:28 AM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
hpet overhead on large smp guests
I measured hpet consuming about a half a core's worth of cpu on an
idle Windows 2008 R2 64-way guest. This
Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 09.02.2010, at 07:56, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> - rcuify/fine-grain qemu locks
>
> And this should be done either way, but is probably not a short-term goal.
>
Indeed. We won't get around this longterm as it is a scalability
bottleneck and a killer for RT guest load. We can
On 09.02.2010, at 07:56, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/09/2010 03:28 AM, Chris Wright wrote:
>> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
>>
>
> hpet overhead on large smp guests
>
> I measured hpet consuming about a half a core's worth of cpu on an idle
> Windows 2008 R2
On 02/09/2010 03:28 AM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
hpet overhead on large smp guests
I measured hpet consuming about a half a core's worth of cpu on an idle
Windows 2008 R2 64-way guest. This is mostly due to futex contention,
lik
