Laurent Vivier wrote: >> - perhaps the new fields should be guarded by a #ifdef CONFIG_HYPERVISOR >> (selected by CONFIG_KVM)? that way the (minor) additional overhead is >> only incurred if it can possibly be used. I imagine that our canine >> cousin will want to use this as well. >> > > There is also a CONFIG_VIRTUALIZATION and a CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING (from > s390 and powerpc) Which one to use ? >
Are these options for using the kernel as a guest or host? I'd guess the former. > I'm wondering if we can have a more accurate accounting: > > - For the moment we add all system time since the previous entering to the > VCPU > to the guest time (and I guess there is some real system time in it ???) > > - Perhaps we can sum nanoseconds spent in the VCPU and add it to cpustat when > these ns are greater than 1 ms ? (I'm trying to make something in this way) > I think that it's okay to use the same method as user/system time accounting. But Ingo the the right man to ask. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
