* Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> [2010-12-13 12:02:51]: > On 12/11/2010 08:57 AM, Balbir Singh wrote: > > >If the vpcu holding the lock runs more and capped, the timeslice > >transfer is a heuristic that will not help. > > That indicates you really need the cap to be per guest, and > not per VCPU. > Yes, I personally think so too, but I suspect there needs to be a larger agreement on the semantics. The VCPU semantics in terms of power apply to each VCPU as opposed to the entire system (per guest). > Having one VCPU spin on a lock (and achieve nothing), because > the other one cannot give up the lock due to hitting its CPU > cap could lead to showstoppingly bad performance. Yes, that seems right! -- Three Cheers, Balbir -- 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
