* Avi Kivity <[email protected]> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >Is this intended for 2.6.20, or would you prefer that we release what we
> >have now and hold this off for 2.6.21?
> >
>
> Even though these patches are potentially destabilazing, I'd like them
> (and a few other patches) to go into 2.6.20:
>
> - kvm did not exist in 2.6.19, hence we cannot regress from that
> - this patchset is the difference between a working proof of concept and
> a generally usable system
> - from my testing, it's quite stable
seconded - i have tested the new MMU changes quite extensively and they
are converging nicely. It brings down context-switch costs by a factor
of 10 and more, even for microbenchmarks: instead of throwing away the
full shadow pagetable hiearchy we have worked so hard to construct this
patchset allows the intelligent caching of shadow pagetables. The effect
is human-visible as well - the system got visibly snappier.
(I'd increase the shadow cache pool from the current 256 pages to at
least 1024 pages, but that's a detail.)
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
