On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:28:52PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 08/13/2009 09:15 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >>> I wonder though if mmu notifiers can be used to make it transparent... >>> >> >> Maybe they can, but that decision belongs to KVM. >> Avi, what do you think? >> >> > > I don't see how mmu notifiers help. You can use mmu notifiers to sync > an external mmu to the linux pagetables, but that's not the case here. > > I see the following options: > > - mprotect() guest memory, trap faults, mprotect() back > > Will work, but exceedingly slowly and wastefully I think this is what Anthony had in mind. > - add a generic user visible dirty bit tracking based on linux ptes > > A lot of work, not sure if useful beyond kvm > > - implement vhost dirty bit tracking > > Not too difficult; not sure if it's worth the effort though > > - reuse the kvm dirty bitmap > > Not too difficult but introduces tight coupling between vhost and kvm > which might slow down development > > - drop to userspace for live migration > > Reuse qemu code, lose some performance This is what I planned. Note that ability to drop to userspace is required for non-MSI mode, anyway. > -- > error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
