Re: [PATCH 3/7] KVM-HV: KVM Steal time implementation

[Glauber Costa]

On 06/20/2011 05:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/20/2011 10:21 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 04:02:22PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > On 06/19/2011 03:59 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > >On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 03:35:58PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > >> On 06/15/2011 12:09 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Actually, I'd expect most read/writes to benefit from caching,
> > no?
> > > >> >> So why don't we just rename kvm_write_guest_cached() to
> > > >> >> kvm_write_guest(), and the few places - if any - that need to
> > force
> > > >> >> transversing of the gfn mappings, get renamed to
> > > >> >> kvm_write_guest_uncached ?
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >Good idea. I do not see any places where
> > kvm_write_guest_uncached is
> > > >> >needed from a brief look. Avi?
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> kvm_write_guest_cached() needs something to supply the cache, and
> > > >> needs recurring writes to the same location. Neither of these are
> > > >> common (for example, instruction emulation doesn't have either).
> > > >>
> > > >Correct. Missed that. So what about changing steal time to use
> > > >kvm_write_guest_cached()?
> > >
> > > Makes sense, definitely. Want to post read_guest_cached() as well?
> > >
> > Glauber can you write read_guest_cached() as part of your series (should
> > be trivial), or do you want me to do it? I do not have a code to test it
> > with though :)
>
> Yes.
>
> (you can write it, and Glauber can include it in the series)
Write it, handle me the patch, I'll include it and test it.

--
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/