From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Izik Eidus <ieidus@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] kvm: change the dirty page tracking to work with
 dirty bity
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:48:52 +0300
Message-ID: <4A30D304.5080100@redhat.com>
References: <1244651005-18322-1-git-send-email-ieidus@redhat.com> <1244651005-18322-2-git-send-email-ieidus@redhat.com> <1244651005-18322-3-git-send-email-ieidus@redhat.com> <4A30CF5D.4010701@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:34571 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1760443AbZFKJss (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:48:48 -0400
Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26])
	by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5B9mpgZ026855
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:48:51 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4A30CF5D.4010701@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Izik Eidus wrote:
>> change the dirty page tracking to work with dirty bity instead of 
>> page fault.
>> right now the dirty page tracking work with the help of page faults, 
>> when we
>> want to track a page for being dirty, we write protect it and we mark 
>> it dirty
>> when we have write page fault, this code move into looking at the 
>> dirty bit
>> of the spte.
>>
>>   
>
> I'm concerned about performance during the later stages of live 
> migration.  Even if only 1000 pages are dirty, you still have to look 
> at 2,000,000 or more ptes (for an 8GB guest).  That's a lot of overhead.
>
> I think we need to use the page table hierarchy, write protect the 
> upper page table so we know which page tables we need to look at.
>
>

Great idea, so i add another bitmap for the page directory?
>>  
>> +static int vmx_dirty_bit_support(void)
>> +{
>> +    return false;
>> +}
>>   
>
> It's false only when ept is enabled.
>

Yea, that i found out already....