From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nadav Amit Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:02:25 -0700 Message-ID: <540BB5C2-CEAE-47D2-845B-2DDEF3CDC303@gmail.com> References: <20170321225116.GJ2231@HEDWIG.INI.CMU.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: =?utf-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , LKML , Paolo Bonzini , Jonathan Corbet , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , X86 ML , Joerg Roedel , KVM list , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org To: Gabriel Somlo Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170321225116.GJ2231@HEDWIG.INI.CMU.EDU> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org > On Mar 21, 2017, at 3:51 PM, Gabriel Somlo wrote: >=20 > And I get the exact same results on the MacBookAir4,2 (which exhibits > no freezing or extreme sluggishness when running OS X 10.7 smp with > Michael's KVM MWAIT-in-L1 patch)... Sorry for my confusion. I didn=E2=80=99t read the entire thread and = thought that the problem is spurious wake-ups. Since that is not the case, I would just suggest two things that you can freely ignore: 1. According to the SDM, when an interrupt is delivered, the interrupt is only delivered on the following instruction, so you may consider skipping the MWAIT first. 2. Perhaps the CPU changes for some reason GUEST_ACTIVITY_STATE (which is not according to the SDM). That is it. No more BS from me. Nadav=