From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/10] KVM: Add TMEM host/guest support
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:25:16 +0200
Message-ID: <1339442716.4999.80.camel@lappy>
References: <1338988073-6913-1-git-send-email-levinsasha928@gmail.com>
	 <4FCF5A08.7080306@redhat.com> <1339161641.3200.15.camel@lappy>
	 <4FD5A7CE.5060205@redhat.com> <1339410370.4999.35.camel@lappy>
	 <4FD5DA5F.7090905@redhat.com>
	 <06ae24f8-5083-49c4-9b9f-af553e1cdf68@default>
	 <4FD625A7.5020707@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>, mtosatti@redhat.com,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-gh0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:65189 "EHLO
	mail-gh0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750731Ab2FKTYJ (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:24:09 -0400
Received: by ghrr11 with SMTP id r11so2815934ghr.19
        for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 12:24:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4FD625A7.5020707@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 20:06 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Sorry, no, first demonstrate no performance regressions, then we can
> talk about performance improvements. 

No performance regressions? For caching? How would that work?

Or even if you meant just the kvm-tmem interface overhead, I don't see
how that would work.