On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 14:42 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 12/01/2010 02:35 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 14:24 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > > >> Even if we equalized the amount of CPU time each VCPU > >> ends up getting across some time interval, that is no > >> guarantee they get useful work done, or that the time > >> gets fairly divided to _user processes_ running inside > >> the guest. > > > > Right, and Jeremy was working on making the guest load-balancer aware of > > that so the user-space should get fairly scheduled on service (of > > course, that's assuming you run a linux guest with that logic in). > > At that point, you might not need the host side balancing > any more, since the guest can move around processes > internally (if needed). Not quite sure what you're saying, host load-balancing is always needed, but if you're talking about the whole directed yield thing, then yes, paravirt spinlocks will take care of that. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
