[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9
From: |
Alexander Graf |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9 |
Date: |
Tue, 9 Feb 2010 08:16:19 +0100 |
On 09.02.2010, at 07:56, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/09/2010 03:28 AM, Chris Wright wrote:
>> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
>>
>
> hpet overhead on large smp guests
>
> I measured hpet consuming about a half a core's worth of cpu on an idle
> Windows 2008 R2 64-way guest. This is mostly due to futex contention, likely
> from the qemu mutex.
>
> Options:
> - ignore, this is about 1% of the entire system (but overhead might increase
> greatly if a workload triggers more hpet accesses)
> - push hpet into kernel, with virtio-net, virtio-blk, and kernel-hpet,
> there's little reason to exit into qemu
That sounds like a good idea to me. It'd make the hpet en par with the lapic as
timing source concerning overhead.
> - rcuify/fine-grain qemu locks
And this should be done either way, but is probably not a short-term goal.
Alex
- [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Chris Wright, 2010/02/08
- [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Avi Kivity, 2010/02/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9,
Alexander Graf <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Jan Kiszka, 2010/02/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Anthony Liguori, 2010/02/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Avi Kivity, 2010/02/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Anthony Liguori, 2010/02/09
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Avi Kivity, 2010/02/09
[Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Anthony Liguori, 2010/02/09
[Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9, Avi Kivity, 2010/02/09