[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091001011721.GK3958@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:17:21 -0700
From: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
To: "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@...el.com>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org" <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
"matthew@....cx" <matthew@....cx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ACS v3 1/1]
* Kay, Allen M (allen.m.kay@...el.com) wrote:
> On the other hand, can we say VT-d PT mode is mainly for KVM
> virtualization use case? If so, is it reasonable to say performance of
> host P2P in this mode is not of highest priority?
Guess it depends on the workload. Would be helpful to identify a use
case that is p2p heavy (and then the impact of enabling ACS).
> If not, another option is to have a kernel boot parameter to
> configure an kernel boot instance to be either host kernel optimized or
> virtualization optimized. I don't know whether this is a reasonable or
> not ...
I was thinking that ACS could be enabled if an IOMMU is enabled. Not a
perfect fit, but seems reasonably close.
thanks,
-chris
--
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