[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A031471.7000406@novell.com>
Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 13:03:45 -0400
From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
CC: Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] generic hypercall support
Chris Wright wrote:
> * Gregory Haskins (ghaskins@...ell.com) wrote:
>
>> Chris Wright wrote:
>>
>>> VF drivers can also have this issue (and typically use mmio).
>>> I at least have a better idea what your proposal is, thanks for
>>> explanation. Are you able to demonstrate concrete benefit with it yet
>>> (improved latency numbers for example)?
>>>
>> I had a test-harness/numbers for this kind of thing, but its a bit
>> crufty since its from ~1.5 years ago. I will dig it up, update it, and
>> generate/post new numbers.
>>
>
> That would be useful, because I keep coming back to pio and shared
> page(s) when think of why not to do this. Seems I'm not alone in that.
>
> thanks,
> -chris
>
I completed the resurrection of the test and wrote up a little wiki on
the subject, which you can find here:
http://developer.novell.com/wiki/index.php/WhyHypercalls
Hopefully this answers Chris' "show me the numbers" and Anthony's "Why
reinvent the wheel?" questions.
I will include this information when I publish the updated v2 series
with the s/hypercall/dynhc changes.
Let me know if you have any questions.
-Greg
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (267 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists