From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale•com>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse•de>
Cc: Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008 <B02008@freescale•com>,
"kvm@vger•kernel.org" <kvm@vger•kernel.org>,
Wood Scott-B07421 <B07421@freescale•com>,
"kvm-ppc@vger•kernel.org" <kvm-ppc@vger•kernel.org>,
"tiejun.chen" <tiejun.chen@windriver•com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists•ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists•ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [v1][KVM][PATCH 1/1] kvm:ppc:booehv: direct ISI exception to Guest
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 14:22:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1368213757.19683.10@snotra> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F4F07A17-8E1E-433D-9749-68D1495C42A7@suse.de> (from agraf@suse.de on Fri May 10 12:57:33 2013)
On 05/10/2013 12:57:33 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Could you guys please collect performance data during the next weeks =20
> on both guest-directed ISIs as well as VF MMIOs (preferably with =20
> in-kernel MMIO), so that we can decide on the direction that's worth =20
> going towards?
Collecting data on VF MMIO would require implementing it (or at least =20
salvaging and fixing some old code), which is not a high priority at =20
the moment. If we do implement VF in the future we could always undo =20
the direct ISI change, but it would still be nice to know if there's =20
any real benefit in the first place.
FWIW, I doubt that the "more stress on HW TLB" will be significant.
-Scott=
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-10 19:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-07 11:06 [v1][KVM][PATCH 1/1] kvm:ppc:booehv: direct ISI exception to Guest Tiejun Chen
2013-05-07 23:40 ` Scott Wood
2013-05-08 1:53 ` tiejun.chen
2013-05-08 9:20 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-05-08 9:28 ` tiejun.chen
2013-05-09 10:23 ` tiejun.chen
2013-05-09 11:34 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-05-09 11:40 ` tiejun.chen
2013-05-09 12:36 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-05-10 17:57 ` Alexander Graf
2013-05-10 19:22 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2013-05-10 19:39 ` Alexander Graf
2013-05-13 2:04 ` tiejun.chen
2013-05-08 19:09 ` Scott Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1368213757.19683.10@snotra \
--to=scottwood@freescale$(echo .)com \
--cc=B02008@freescale$(echo .)com \
--cc=B07421@freescale$(echo .)com \
--cc=agraf@suse$(echo .)de \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists$(echo .)ozlabs.org \
--cc=tiejun.chen@windriver$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox