On 8/21/07, Christian Borntraeger <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am Montag, 20. August 2007 schrieb Glauber de Oliveira Costa:
> > Although I don't know KVM to a that deep level, I think it should be
> > possible to keep the virtual cpus in different process (or threads),
> > and take the accounting time from there. Perfectly possible to know
> > the time we spent running (user time), and the time the hypervisor
> > spent doing things on our behalf (system time).
>
> I disagree here. First thing, you dont want to have the virtual cpu in a
> different process than the hypervisor control code for that cpu. Otherwise
> communication has to be made via IPC.
> Secondly, Its not qemu/kvm that does the accouting. Its existing userspace
> code like top/snmp agents and clients! etc. that would require additional
> knowledge which thread is guest code.
Yes, the second argument kills me, and I think it leaves no further
room from discussion in my side. Thanks for the enlightenment.
> I personally like the approach Laurent has taken. Maybe it needs some polish
> and maybe we want an account_guest_time function, but in general I think he
> is doing the right thing.
>
Now, me too.
--
Glauber de Oliveira Costa.
"Free as in Freedom"
http://glommer.net
"The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act."
-
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]
