From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: QEMU PIC indirection patch for in-kernel APIC work Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 19:32:14 +0300 Message-ID: <4613D30E.7030905@qumranet.com> References: <8FFF7E42E93CC646B632AB40643802A8025B962E@scsmsx412.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: "Nakajima, Jun" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <8FFF7E42E93CC646B632AB40643802A8025B962E-1a9uaKK1+wJcIJlls4ac1rfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Nakajima, Jun wrote: > Most of H/W-virtualization capable processors out there don't support > that feature today. I think the decision (kvm or qemu) should be done > based on performance data. I'm not worried about maintenance issues; the > APIC code is not expected to change frequently. I'm a bit worried about > extra complexity caused by such split, though. > > In principle we could measure the performance cost today with the pv-net driver; however it still does a lot of copies which could be eliminated. > BTW, I see CPU utilization of qemu is almost always 99% in the top > command when I run kernel build in an x86-64 Linux guest. > Isn't that expected? if your guest image is mostly cached in the host, the guest would have nothing to block on. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV