[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1242810616.26820.562.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 11:10:16 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: Mark Langsdorf <mark.langsdorf@....com>,
Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][KVM][retry 3] Add support for Pause Filtering to AMD
SVM
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 12:04 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> It's a fully virtualized guest. There's no way to get this without
> >> patching the guest kernel.
> >>
> >
> > Yes there is.. virtualized monitor-wait stuff coupled with a
> > monitor-wait based spinlock implementation.
> >
>
> That only works if the guest uses monitor/mwait. Not all of the guests
> are under our control. I don't know whether Windows uses
> monitor/mwait. Further, we don't have timed exits on mwait like we do
> with pause.
Ugh, you really care about crap like windows?
> I've also heard that monitor/mwait are very slow and only usable on idle
> loop stuff.
Yeah, current implementations suck, doesn't mean it has to stay that
way.
> > Once we go change silicon, you might as well do it right.
> >
>
> None of the major x86 vendors are under my control.
I thought this patch came from AMD, who changed their silicon so 'solve'
one of these virt problems.
/me goes hide again, and pretend all of virt doesn't exist :-) Think
happy thoughts.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists