* Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > So? I only inquired about latencies, asking what impact on > > latencies is. Regardless of the circumstances we do not want to > > introduce unbound latencies. > > > > If there are no unbound latencies then i'm happy. > > Sure, I'm just saying that the mechanism was invented for > unmodified guests :). Well, but that does not excuse the introduction of unbound latencies. (if those latencies are introduced here - i don't know, i'm asking.) > > Well, since user-space gets the MMIOs only once the guest exits > > it's not independent, is it? > > If we don't know when a guest ends an MMIO stream, we can't > optimize it. Period. [...] But that's no excuse. If you cannot optimize them without unnacceptable collateral damage then don't optimize it then. That's why i asked what the damage is - if there's any damage. Thanks, Ingo -- 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
