From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Glauber Costa Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] KVM-HDR Add constant to represent KVM MSRs enabled bit Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 10:21:54 -0300 Message-ID: <4E0C7872.9060002@redhat.com> References: <1309361388-30163-1-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com> <1309361388-30163-3-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com> <20110629215608.GA3557@mgebm.net> <4E0C3458.6090801@redhat.com> <20110630125938.GA4823@mgebm.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Avi Kivity , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rik van Riel , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Peter Zijlstra , Anthony Liguori To: Eric B Munson Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110630125938.GA4823@mgebm.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 06/30/2011 09:59 AM, Eric B Munson wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 06/30/2011 12:56 AM, Eric B Munson wrote: >>> My mail provider seems to have dropped patch 1 of the series so I can't reply >>> directly to it, please add my Tested-by there as well. >> >> How did you test it then? >> > > I built host and guest kernels with the patches and pinned a while(1) and the > CPU thread from qemu to CPU 2 on the host. I then started the same while(1) > process in guest and verified that I see ~50% steal time reported. > > I then built 2.6.39 (just the code I had present) on the guest and time it > while it was competing with the while(1) on the host for CPU time. Next I > built the guest kernel with STEAL_TIME=N and reran the kernel compile to make > sure that there weren't any huge variations in performace. > > Eric I think what Avi means is, it won't even compile without PATCH 1/9. If you don't have it, how could you test it ?