On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:12:45AM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 12/06/2016 10:20 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 09:06:17PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >> On 12/01/2016 08:26 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >>> This patch is based on the algorithm for the
On 12/06/2016 10:20 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 09:06:17PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> On 12/01/2016 08:26 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>> This patch is based on the algorithm for the kvm.ko halt_poll_ns
>>> parameter in Linux. The initial polling time is zero.
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 09:06:17PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 12/01/2016 08:26 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > This patch is based on the algorithm for the kvm.ko halt_poll_ns
> > parameter in Linux. The initial polling time is zero.
> >
> > If the event loop is woken up within the
On 12/01/2016 08:26 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> This patch is based on the algorithm for the kvm.ko halt_poll_ns
> parameter in Linux. The initial polling time is zero.
>
> If the event loop is woken up within the maximum polling time it means
> polling could be effective, so grow polling time.
This patch is based on the algorithm for the kvm.ko halt_poll_ns
parameter in Linux. The initial polling time is zero.
If the event loop is woken up within the maximum polling time it means
polling could be effective, so grow polling time.
If the event loop is woken up beyond the maximum
