[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F2E8136.2060408@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:16:38 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
CC: KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Next gen kvm api
On 02/05/2012 12:58 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > >
> > > Reduced performance is what I mean. Obviously old guests will continue working.
> >
> > I'm not happy about it either.
> >
> It is not only about old guests either. In RHEL we pretend to not
> support HPET because when some guests detect it they are accessing
> its mmio frequently for certain workloads. For Linux guests we can
> avoid that by using kvmclock. For Windows guests I hope we will have
> enlightenment timers + RTC, but what about other guests? *BSD? How often
> they access HPET when it is available? We will probably have to move
> HPET into the kernel if we want to make it usable.
If we have to, we'll do it.
> So what is the criteria for device to be emulated in userspace vs kernelspace
> in new API? Never? What about vhost-net then? Only if a device works in MSI
> mode? This may work for HPET case, but looks like artificial limitation
> since the problem with HPET is not interrupt latency, but mmio space
> access.
The criteria is, if it's absolutely necessary.
> And BTW, what about enlightenment timers for Windows? Are we going to
> implement them in userspace or kernel?
The kernel.
--
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