>I think this is a really nice and important patch set.  Just a couple
>On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 00:02 +0200, Luca Tettamanti wrote:
>> > In this case the dyn-tick minimum res will be 1msec. I believe it
>> > work ok since this is the case without any dyn-tick.
>> Actually minimum resolution depends on host HZ setting, but - yes -
>> essentially you have the same behaviour of the "unix" timer, plus the
>> overhead of reprogramming the timer.
>Is this significant?  At a high guest HZ, this is could be quite a lot
>of additional syscalls right?

I believe it's no significant since without dyn-tick the guest will get
same amount of signals so the overhead is doubling the syscalls (not a 
magnitude bigger).

On the other size guests with low HZ and linux guests with dyn-tick will
from lesser syscalls.

Reply via email to