Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving undercommit,overcommit scenarios in PLE handler | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:13:05 +0200 |
| |
On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 06:40 -0500, Andrew Theurer wrote: > It will be interesting to see how this behaves with a very high lock > activity in a guest. Once the scheduler defers preemption, is it for > a > fixed amount of time, or does it know to cut the deferral short as > soon > as the lock depth is reduced [by x]?
Since the locks live in a guest/userspace, we don't even know they're held at all, let alone when state changes.
Also, afaik PLE simply exits the guest whenever you do a busy-wait, there's no guarantee its due to a lock at all, we could be waiting for a 'virtual' hardware resource or whatnot.
| |