Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:21:22 +0900 | From | Takuya Yoshikawa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] kvm: Handle undercommitted guest case in PLE handler |
| |
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:12:49 +0200 Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> It will. The tradeoff is between false-positive costs (undercommit) and > true positive costs (overcommit). I think undercommit should perform > well no matter what. > > If we utilize preempt notifiers to track overcommit dynamically, then we > can vary the spin time dynamically. Keep it long initially, as we get > more preempted vcpus make it shorter.
What will happen if we pin each vcpu thread to some core? I don't want to see so many vcpu threads moving around without being pinned at all.
In that case, we don't want to make KVM do any work of searching a vcpu thread to yield to.
Thanks, Takuya
| |