[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120411211514.35db29c11460516e604059b6@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:15:14 +0900
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@...il.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] KVM: MMU: fast page fault
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 19:58:44 +0800
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> No, i do not really agree with that.
>
> We really can get great benefit from O(1) especially if lockless write-protect
> is introduced for O(1), live migration is very useful for cloud computing
> architecture to balance the overload on all nodes.
Recently, you said to me that you were not familiar with live migration.
Actually you did not know the basics of pre-copy live migration.
I know live migration better than you because NTT has Kemari and it uses
live migration infrastructure. My work is originated from the data
I got during profiling Kemari.
SRCU-less dirty logging was also motivated by the pressures from scheduler
developers. Everything was really needed.
Have you ever used live migration for real service?
I cannot say whether O(1) is OK with me without any real background.
Takuya
--
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