Am Sonntag, 13. Juli 2008 schrieb Avi Kivity: > Carsten Otte wrote: > > Avi Kivity wrote: > >> What is the overhead of ktime_get()? > > I think I'd like an arch specific timestamp. This way we could use our > > clock-cycle-granularity-non-privileged-timestamp instruction ;-). If > > we need a common implementation, I don't think there's much difference > > between different syscalls in terms of overhead. > > This is all in-kernel, so no syscalls. Since I doubt you need sub-ns > granularity for kvmtrace, can we do without an arch hook?
Yes. I just talked with our kernel maintainers and we do not want another special case for s390. If ktime_get is fine for blktrace, scheduler and almost any other kernel core component - it is fine for tracing. I also talked to Christian Ehrhardt and he will send an updated patch set soon. Christian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
