[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170928213508.GA14053@amt.cnet>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 18:35:08 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
mingo@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/3] x86: kvm guest side support for KVM_HC_RT_PRIO
hypercall\
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 09:22:02AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 28/09/2017 02:44, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >> Again: if you have many interruptions, it's not a flaw in KVM or QEMU's
> >> design, it's just that someone is doing something stupid. It could be
> >> the guest (e.g. unnecessary devices or daemons as in the example above),
> >> QEMU (e.g. the RTC emulation used to trigger QEMU timers twice a second
> >> just to increment the clock), or the management (e.g. polling "is the VM
> >> running" 50 times per second). But it can and must be fixed.
> >
> > No, i mean you can run anything in VCPU-0 (it is valid to do that).
> > And that "anything" can generate 1 interrupt per second, 1000 or 10.000
> > interrupts per second. Which are all valid things to be done.
> >
> > "I can't run a kernel compilation on VCPU-0 because that will impact
> > latency on the realtime VCPU-1" is not acceptable.
>
> That shouldn't happen. Sources of frequent interruptions have all been
> fixed or moved outside the main thread.
>
> If there are more left, report the bug and we'll see how to fix it in
> userspace.
>
> Paolo
What should not happen? The generation of 10.000 interrupts per second
(say disk IO completion) on a given workload ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists