Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:23:12 +0900 | | From | Avi Kivity <> | | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL RFC] pvclock cleanups and pvclock vsyscall support |
| |
On 10/18/2009 05:18 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 10/18/09 15:43, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 10/16/2009 04:46 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> >>> Care to cook up a patch to implement the kvm bits to make sure it all >>> works OK for you? >>> >>> >> I've started to do that, but it occurs to me that we're missing out on >> NUMA placement by forcing all clocks to be on the same page. OTOH, if >> the clocks are heavily used, they'll stay in cache, and if not, who >> cares. >> > Yes, I'd say so. I'd expect the data to be very close to read-only, so > the lines should be shared pretty efficiently. > >
There wouldn't be any sharing since each clock is on its own cache line. But the point is valid regardless.
> On the other hand, there's nothing to stop us from moving to multiple > pages in future (either to support NUMA placement, or just more than 64 > cpus). >
I'm already allocating multiple pages, so we'd just need to adjust the fixmap.
-- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.
|  |