On 02/01/2011 09:58 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
Guest reads version (result: 2)
Guest starts reading data
Live migration; vcpu-arch.sversion is zeroed
Steal time update; vcpu-arch.sversion += 2; write to guest
Guest continues reading data
Guest reads version (result: 2)
So the guest
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 15:13 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/28/2011 09:52 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
To implement steal time, we need the hypervisor to pass the guest
information
about how much time was spent running other processes outside the VM.
This is per-vcpu, and using the kvmclock
On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 19:09 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/01/2011 05:48 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
@@ -2106,6 +2120,25 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
int cpu)
kvm_migrate_timers(vcpu);
vcpu-cpu = cpu;
}
On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 14:52 -0500, Glauber Costa wrote:
+ u64 to = (get_kernel_ns() - vcpu-arch.this_time_out);
+ /*
+* using nanoseconds introduces noise, which accumulates
easily
+* leading to big steal time values. We want,
On 01/28/2011 09:52 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
To implement steal time, we need the hypervisor to pass the guest information
about how much time was spent running other processes outside the VM.
This is per-vcpu, and using the kvmclock structure for that is an abuse
we decided not to make.
In
To implement steal time, we need the hypervisor to pass the guest information
about how much time was spent running other processes outside the VM.
This is per-vcpu, and using the kvmclock structure for that is an abuse
we decided not to make.
In this patchset, I am introducing a new msr,
On 01/28/2011 02:52 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
To implement steal time, we need the hypervisor to pass the guest information
about how much time was spent running other processes outside the VM.
This is per-vcpu, and using the kvmclock structure for that is an abuse
we decided not to make.
In
