Re: [RESEND][PATCH 0/4] Virtual Machine Time Accounting

[Alistair John Strachan <alistair@devzero.co.uk>]

On Monday 10 September 2007 14:08:45 Laurent Vivier wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> * Laurent Vivier <Laurent.Vivier@bull.net> wrote:
> >>> Ingo, please, could you have a look to these patches ?
> >>>
> >>> The aim of these four patches is to introduce Virtual Machine time
> >>> accounting.
> >>>
> >>> [PATCH 1/4] as recent CPUs introduce a third running state, after
> >>> "user" and "system", we need a new field, "guest", in cpustat to
> >>> store the time used by the CPU to run virtual CPU. Modify /proc/stat
> >>> to display this new field.
> >>
> >> the concept certainly looks sane to me.
> >>
> >> The heavy-handed use of #ifdefs uglifies the code to a large degree,
> >> but this is not a fundamental problem: since basically all distros
> >> have KVM enabled (and lguest benefits from this too), could you just
> >> make all this new code unconditional?
> >
> > I imagine the embedded people will complain... perhaps move all the code
> > to a #ifdef section above with a full implementation and a stub
> > implementation.
>
> I'm going to repost patches without #ifdefs for readability.
> Then we could discuss if we should introduce #ifdefs and how.

If you could provide a summary of the size increase from your latest post 
(i.e., size of the kernel before and after) that might lay rest to some 
theoretical complaints.

This doesn't look like enough code to warrant ifdefs.

-- 
Cheers,
Alistair.

137/1 Warrender Park Road, Edinburgh, UK.