Re: [PATCH 0/11] VMI / Paravirt bugfixes for 2.6.21

From: Zachary Amsden
Date: Tue Feb 06 2007 - 04:25:39 EST


Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 16:11 +1100, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 20:54 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote:
Rusty Russell wrote:
Indeed, I'm expecting to push lguest this week, and this code will
effect me, so I'd like to see this in a -mm soon...
Yes, I took a look at the lguest changes today and I think these won't generate conflicts, just make stuff easier for you ;) Course you've now got a couple new paravirt-ops to support, but the native ones are fine for temporary use.
Implementing stolen time is something I'd like to do, since it'd be a
nice self-contained example the expectations.


hmm stolen time could even be useful without virtualization; to a large
degree, if cpufreq reduces the speed of your cpu you have "stolen
cycles" that way... I wonder if this concept can be used for that as
well...

Yes, stolen time happens in most moderns systems as a result of power management (and you can probably count SMM cycles as stolen if only there was a way to count them). It would be useful to report on a laptop, for instance, how many cycles have been stolen by running off battery or on a server because of heat issues. Having an interface for Linux to report this seems useful. It is a covert channel, however, in a virtualized environment, so there should be some provision in the hypervisor to turn it off.

Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/