On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:12:49 +0200
Avi Kivity <a...@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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
