From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: vtime accounting Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 18:09:45 +0100 Message-ID: <1d205be1-50ab-59cf-9908-dbbe8c939309@redhat.com> References: <20170308105700.GA109453@lvm> <20170313162259.GE18298@potion> <20170314082601.GC1277@cbox> <20170314165858.GA5435@potion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Christoffer Dall , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier , Rik van Riel To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Christoffer Dall Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57436 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750950AbdCNRJs (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2017 13:09:48 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170314165858.GA5435@potion> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 14/03/2017 17:58, Radim Krčmář wrote: >> I assume there's a good reason why we call guest_enter() and >> guest_exit() in the hot path on every KVM architecture? > I consider myself biased when it comes to jiffies, so no judgement. :) > > From what I see, the mode switch is used only for statistics. vtime is only for statistics, but guest_enter/exit are important because they enter an RCU extended quiescent state. This means that (physical) CPUs running a guest are effectively "off" from the point of view of the RCU accounting machinery. Not having to perform any RCU work is very good for jitter. Paolo