From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755500AbZG2NjF (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:39:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754813AbZG2NjE (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:39:04 -0400 Received: from tx2ehsobe001.messaging.microsoft.com ([65.55.88.11]:33091 "EHLO TX2EHSOBE002.bigfish.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754469AbZG2NjC (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:39:02 -0400 X-SpamScore: -26 X-BigFish: VPS-26(zz1432R98dN936eM9371Pzz1202hzzz32i6bh203h43j61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 X-WSS-ID: 0KNJPWG-03-7L4-01 Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:38:40 +0200 From: Joerg Roedel To: Avi Kivity CC: Alexander Graf , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/12] Nested SVM cleanups Message-ID: <20090729133840.GG18313@amd.com> References: <1248872192-30881-1-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <4A70492E.2080705@redhat.com> <20090729130944.GE18313@amd.com> <4A704F5B.9000800@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A704F5B.9000800@redhat.com> Organization: Advanced Micro Devices =?iso-8859-1?Q?GmbH?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2C_Karl-Hammerschmidt-Str=2E_34=2C_85609_Dornach_bei_M=FC?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?nchen=2C_Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrer=3A_Thomas_M=2E_McCoy=2C_Giuli?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?ano_Meroni=2C_Sitz=3A_Dornach=2C_Gemeinde_Aschheim=2C_Land?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?kreis_M=FCnchen=2C_Registergericht_M=FCnchen?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2C?= HRB Nr. 43632 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jul 2009 13:38:40.0989 (UTC) FILETIME=[E26118D0:01CA1051] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:32:11PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 07/29/2009 04:09 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: > >>I seem to recall nested smp used to be broken. Am I mistaken, or do > >>these patches fix rather than clean up? > > > >Nested SMP was broken in one of the early version of the nested SVM > >code. In the current upstream version it works quite well. > > In that case, the next interesting target is nested npt. This may > actually make nsvm perform well. Any plans? Yes. Plan is to implement this when I am through with the cleanups. Joerg