|
From: | Dor Laor |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu-kvm: introduce cpu_start/cpu_stop commands |
Date: | Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:16:05 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.1.6-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.6 ThunderBrowse/3.3.2 |
On 11/23/2010 08:41 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/23/2010 01:00 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:qemu-kvm vcpu threads don't response to SIGSTOP/SIGCONT. Instead of teaching them to respond to these signals, introduce monitor commands that stop and start individual vcpus. The purpose of these commands are to implement CPU hard limits using an external tool that watches the CPU consumption and stops the CPU as appropriate.
Why not use cgroup for that?
The monitor commands provide a more elegant solution that signals because it ensures that a stopped vcpu isn't holding the qemu_mutex.From signal(7): The signals SIGKILL and SIGSTOP cannot be caught, blocked, or ignored. Perhaps this is a bug in kvm? If we could catch SIGSTOP, then it would be easy to unblock it only while running in guest context. It would then stop on exit to userspace. Using monitor commands is fairly heavyweight for something as high frequency as this. What control period do you see people using? Maybe we should define USR1 for vcpu start/stop. What happens if one vcpu is stopped while another is running? Spin loops, synchronous IPIs will take forever. Maybe we need to stop the entire process.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |