From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.windriver.com (mail1.windriver.com [147.11.146.13]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail1.windriver.com", Issuer "Intel External Basic Issuing CA 3A" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 794C52C010A for ; Wed, 8 May 2013 11:53:59 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <5189B02E.3000109@windriver.com> Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 09:53:50 +0800 From: "tiejun.chen" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [v1][KVM][PATCH 1/1] kvm:ppc:booehv: direct ISI exception to Guest References: <1367970043.3398.39@snotra> In-Reply-To: <1367970043.3398.39@snotra> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, agraf@suse.de, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 05/08/2013 07:40 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > On 05/07/2013 06:06:30 AM, Tiejun Chen wrote: >> We also can direct ISI exception to Guest like DSI. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen >> --- >> arch/powerpc/kvm/booke_emulate.c | 3 +++ >> arch/powerpc/kvm/e500mc.c | 3 ++- >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Are you seeing a real performance improvement from this? This will interfere No. But after we reduce the exit to host, shouldn't this improve performance? > somewhat with using the VF bit, if we were to ever do so, since VF only affects Sorry, what is the VF you said? Tiejun