On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:12:08AM +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote: > On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 13:28:15 +0200 > Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 07:37:18PM +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote: > > > We can check if accum_steal has any positive value instead of using > > > KVM_REQ_STEAL_UPDATE bit in vcpu->requests; and this is the way we > > > usually do for accounting for something in the kernel. > > > > > Now you added check that will be done on each guest entry, requests > > mechanism prevents that. > > Yes, +1 "if" for the case we have nothing in requests. > Almost any bit in requests can be replaced by one "if". Those if's add up. > I'm not sure if setting and clearing a bit for that minor > optimization is worth it. > Setting/clearing it should be much more rare than guest entry. -- Gleb. -- 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
