[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160526133331.5aadf122@jnakajim-build>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 13:33:31 -0700
From: yunhong jiang <yunhong.jiang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] KVM: halt-polling: poll for the upcoming fire timers
On Thu, 26 May 2016 12:26:27 +0200
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 25/05/2016 04:47, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>
> >
> > If an emulated lapic timer will fire soon(in the scope of 10us the
> > base of dynamic halt-polling, lower-end of message passing workload
> > latency TCP_RR's poll time < 10us) we can treat it as a short halt,
> > and poll to wait it fire, the fire callback apic_timer_fn() will set
> > KVM_REQ_PENDING_TIMER, and this flag will be check during busy poll.
> > This can avoid context switch overhead and the latency which we wake
> > up vCPU.
>
> As discussed on IRC, I would like to understand why the adaptive
Glad to know the IRC channel. Is #kvm channel on freenode the IRC you are
talking about?
Thanks
--jyh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists