![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Tim Chen wrote: > >> I also hope that the performance can be recovered as this option could >> enabled in distributions' kernels in future. >> > > Yes, the intent is that running a CONFIG_PARAVIRT kernel on native > hardware will have negligible performance hit compared to running a > non-paravirt kernel. > We can validate that claim entirely. The way we are proceeding, the native code will be inlined or direct called as much as possible. With the VMI-Linux code we had earlier, this mostly created <3% overhead for microbenchmarks (and in some cases, we actually won over the unmodified native code). For macro-benchmarks, with real-world workloads, this reduced to immeasurable noise, never off by more than +/- 0.5% IIRC. I believe all of this is totally achievable. We have the technology. We can rebuild it. Zach - 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: 2007-03-03 08:03 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||