On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:12:49 +0200 Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It will. The tradeoff is between false-positive costs (undercommit) and > true positive costs (overcommit). I think undercommit should perform > well no matter what. > > If we utilize preempt notifiers to track overcommit dynamically, then we > can vary the spin time dynamically. Keep it long initially, as we get > more preempted vcpus make it shorter. What will happen if we pin each vcpu thread to some core? I don't want to see so many vcpu threads moving around without being pinned at all. In that case, we don't want to make KVM do any work of searching a vcpu thread to yield to. Thanks, Takuya -- 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
