lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: kvm & dyntick

* Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com> wrote:

> It occurs to me that kvm could benefit greatly from dyntick:
>
> dyntick-enabled host:
> - generate virtual interrupts at whatever HZ the guest programs its
> timers, be it 100, 250, 1000 or whatever
> - avoid expensive vmexits due to useless timer interrupts
>
> dyntick-enabled guest:
> - reduce the load on the host when the guest is idling
> (currently an idle guest consumes a few percent cpu)

yeah. KVM under -rt already works with dynticks enabled on both the host
and the guest. (but it's more optimal to use a dedicated hypercall to
set the next guest-interrupt)

> What are the current plans wrt dyntick? Is it planned for 2.6.21?

yeah, we hope to have it in v2.6.21.

note that s390 (and more recently Xen too) uses a next_timer_interrupt()
based method to stop the guest tick - which works in terms of reducing
guest load, but it doesnt stop the host-side interrupt. The highest
quality approach is to have dynticks on both the host and the guest, and
this also gives high-resolution timers and a modernized
time/timer-events subsystem for both the host and the guest.

Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-01-12 08:17    [W:0.074 / U:0.440 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site