On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 09:58:54AM -0800, Chris Wright wrote: > * Srivatsa Vaddagiri (vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 09:29:06AM -0800, Chris Wright wrote: > > > That's what Marcelo's suggestion does w/out a fill thread. > > > > There's one complication though even with that. How do we compute the > > real utilization of VM (given that it will appear to be burning 100% cycles)? > > We need to have scheduler discount the cycles burnt post halt-exit, so more > > stuff is needed than those simple 3-4 lines! > > Heh, was just about to say the same thing ;) Probably yes. The point is, you get the same effect as with the non-trapping hlt but without the complications on low-level VMX/SVM code. Even better if you can do it with fill thread idea. -- 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
