From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [patch] remove vcpu_info array v5 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:54:26 +0200 Message-ID: <49185932.9010006@redhat.com> References: <4909C00F.8050704@sgi.com> <49103812.1070104@redhat.com> <5d6222a80811040555q5be67439sbd38d94dfa25d8ad@mail.gmail.com> <49105C95.90809@redhat.com> <5d6222a80811040635j70c57efev1f3abc5096803b29@mail.gmail.com> <49105ED8.107@redhat.com> <4918376D.6060201@sgi.com> <491839CF.9060105@redhat.com> <491857A7.1040909@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Glauber Costa , Anthony Liguori , Hollis Blanchard , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "kvm-ia64@vger.kernel.org" To: Jes Sorensen Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:45407 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752582AbYKJPye (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:54:34 -0500 In-Reply-To: <491857A7.1040909@sgi.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jes Sorensen wrote: > If we have reasons where we actually rely on the cpu number, and thats > not counting end-user pretty-number-print concerns, then I found that > we practically never use the cpu number. If we really use it a lot, I > agree we need a fast way, I just didn't hit it in my builds. What did I > miss? > The code I mentioned only runs if the -no-kvm-irqchip option is passed. It's not the highest performing option... So this isn't used a lot. But cpus definitely use cpu numbers (as apic ids), so qemu needs to be prepared to handle this. As to scalability, that takes will take a lot more work than removing/changing arbitrary limits. Look at qemu_mutex and weep. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function