From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: report stolen time via pvclock? Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 18:30:09 -0300 Message-ID: <20100309213009.GA26204@amt.cnet> References: <201003092147.38498.thomas@scripty.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: KVM mailing list To: Thomas Treutner Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:24807 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751940Ab0CIVbm (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2010 16:31:42 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201003092147.38498.thomas@scripty.at> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:47:38PM +0100, Thomas Treutner wrote: > Hi, > > I'm referring to this patchset > > http://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@vger.kernel.org/msg23810.html > > of Marcelo Tosatti. It seems it was never included or even discussed, although > it's nearly half a year old. I wonder if there is a good reason for that? I'd > like to use the steal time for my VMs, as I consider it useful in some cases. There is a problem with it: stolen time is accounted separately (in addition to) user/system/idle. And as you noted there seems to be lack of interest in the feature.