From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] In kernel PIT patch Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:52:24 -0600 Message-ID: <47CD7038.6000200@codemonkey.ws> References: <200803041822.40285.sheng.yang@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To: "Yang, Sheng" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200803041822.40285.sheng.yang@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Yang, Sheng wrote: > Hi > > Here is the last in-kernel PIT patch for KVM. The mainly change from last > version is the supporting to save/restore. I also tested live migration. > > The other modifies including some date structure changed to be better for > supporting the save/restore. I moved the PIT timer to outside of channel > structure, which explicitly means only one channel (channel 0) would trigger > it. > > After fix TSC problem on SMP PAE RHEL5/5.1 guest, now the patch works well > without any modify of kernel parameter. > How are you measuring the improvements from an in-kernel PIT? From your mails, you're claiming it increases the timer accuracy. How are you measuring it and how much does it improve it? Do you expect an overall performance improvement from this or is it simply about improving timer accuracy? Regards, Anthony Liguori ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/