On Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:31:19 +0200 Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Before releasing something like this, where none of us is sure if > > it really saves cpu cost, I'd prefer to run some measurement with > > the whole kicked_mask logic removed and to compare the number of > > vcpu wake ups with the number of interrupts to be processed by > > the gib alert mechanism in a slightly over committed host while > > driving with Matthews test load. > > But I think patch 1 and 2 can go immediately as they measurably or > testable fix things. Correct? I think so as well. And if patch 3 is going to be dropped, I would really like to keep the unconditional clear in kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(), as my analysis in the discussion points out: I think it can save us form trouble this patch is trying to address. Regards, Halil
