[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EEF35B5.2090005@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:01:41 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Eric B Munson <emunson@...bm.net>
CC: mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, arnd@...db.de,
ryanh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, aliguori@...ibm.com, mtosatti@...hat.com,
jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com, levinsasha928@...il.com,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 V5] Avoid soft lockup message when KVM is stopped
by host
On 12/15/2011 08:53 PM, Eric B Munson wrote:
> I am working on V7 to incorporate the __this_cpu_and suggestion, would you
> consider that for inclusion and we can continue discussing the need for the
> preemption notification work?
Okay.
> I think that having a guest complain when the
> host is so loaded that the guest watchdog threads can't make any progress is
> desirable behavior, it may be the only notification that an admin gets that a
> particular host is over loaded.
It's the wrong admin, consider a cloud scenario where the host admin and
guest admin are different people.
Notification on host overload (to initiate migration, say) is a good
idea, but it would be a different mechanism.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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