[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/3] kvm hypervisor : Add hypercalls to support pv-ticketlock
- To: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:49:58 -0800
- Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx>, kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, suzuki@xxxxxxxxxx, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, AmÃrico Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx>, Eric Dumazet <dada1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Virtualization <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:50:40 -0800
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
On 01/22/2011 06:53 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> The main question that remains is whether the PV ticketlocks are
> a large enough improvement to also merge those. I expect they
> will be, and we'll see so in the benchmark numbers.
The pathological worst-case of ticket locks in a virtual environment
isn't very hard to hit, so I expect they'll make a huge difference
there. On lightly loaded systems (little or no CPU overcommit) then
they should be close to a no-op.
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
