>I think this is a really nice and important patch set. Just a couple >things: > >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 >should >> > 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 the 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 enojy from lesser syscalls.
