Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH 0/2][KVM] guest time accounting

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Laurent Vivier wrote:
- perhaps the new fields should be guarded by a #ifdef CONFIG_HYPERVISOR
(selected by CONFIG_KVM)?  that way the (minor) additional overhead is
only incurred if it can possibly be used.  I imagine that our canine
cousin will want to use this as well.

There is also a CONFIG_VIRTUALIZATION and a CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING (from
s390 and powerpc) Which one to use ?

Are these options for using the kernel as a guest or host? I'd guess the former.

I'm wondering if we can have a more accurate accounting:

- For the moment we add all system time since the previous entering to the VCPU
to the guest time (and I guess there is some real system time in it ???)

- Perhaps we can sum nanoseconds spent in the VCPU and add it to cpustat when
these ns are greater than 1 ms ? (I'm trying to make something in this way)

I think that it's okay to use the same method as user/system time accounting. But Ingo the the right man to ask.


--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux