[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201004141836.07477.sheng@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:36:07 +0800
From: Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
oerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@...hat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>, zhiteng.huang@...el.com,
tim.c.chen@...el.com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] perf & kvm: Enhance perf to collect KVM guest os statistics from host side
On Wednesday 14 April 2010 18:33:37 Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 04/14/2010 01:27 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> >> Yes, interesting to see what the latency is. If it's reasonably short
> >> (and I expect it will be so), we can do the busy wait solution.
> >>
> >> If we have an NMI counter somewhere, we can simply wait until it
> >> changes.
> >
> > Good idea. Of course we have one(at least on x86). There is
> > irq_stat.irq__nmi_count for per cpu. :)
>
> Okay, but kvm doesn't want to know about it. How about a new arch
> function, invoke_nmi_sync(), that will trigger the NMI and wait for it?
>
Sound reasonable. Would try it.
--
regards
Yang, Sheng
--
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