Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: VMX: Support hosted VMM coexsitence.

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Avi Kivity
Date: Thursday, March 18, 2010 - 5:55 am

On 03/18/2010 11:49 AM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote:

My worry is that newer processors will cache more and more VMCS contents 
on-chip, so the VMCLEAR/VMXOFF will cause a greater loss with newer 
processors.


Is that the only motivation?  It seems like an odd use-case.  If there 
was no performance impact (current or future), I wouldn't mind, but the 
design of VMPTRLD/VMCLEAR/VMXON/VMXOFF seems to indicate that we want to 
keep a VMCS loaded as much as possible on the processor.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH 0/3] KVM: VMX: Support hosted VMM coexsitence. , Xu, Dongxiao, (Thu Mar 18, 2:49 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: VMX: Support hosted VMM coexsitence., Alexander Graf, (Thu Mar 18, 3:36 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: VMX: Support hosted VMM coexsitence., Avi Kivity, (Thu Mar 18, 5:55 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: VMX: Support hosted VMM coexsitence., Alexander Graf, (Tue Mar 23, 2:12 am)