Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: Tie MWAIT/HLT/PAUSE interception to initially disabled capabilities

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 01:07:32AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 28/11/2017 15:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > I think guests still want some way to halt when
> > giving up CPU for a long time.
> > 
> > If you are not worried about guests entering low power states,
> > then you only need MWAIT and maybe PAUSE.
> > 
> > HLT within guest only makes sense if you do not want to
> > allow guest to enter power state.
> > 
> > If you don't exit on any of these, you want some other way
> > to actually halt the VCPU.
> 
> If you want to do something in userspace, send a signal.  Otherwise, it
> doesn't really matter (if you have a dedicated physical CPU) whether the
> task is runnable or not, as long as the CPU isn't in C0.
> 
> Paolo

If VCPU wants to give up its timeslice, how is it supposed to do it
if all exits are blocked?

-- 
MST