From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S968942AbXHMQFG (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:05:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760827AbXHMOaP (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:30:15 -0400 Received: from il.qumranet.com ([82.166.9.18]:57636 "EHLO il.qumranet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S946016AbXHMOaM (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:30:12 -0400 Message-ID: <46C06AFE.2050702@qumranet.com> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:30:22 +0300 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070419) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Laurent Vivier CC: Christian Borntraeger , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel Subject: Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH 0/2][KVM] guest time accounting References: <46BC8B39.6050202@bull.net> <200708131605.40479.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <46C0693A.1080900@bull.net> In-Reply-To: <46C0693A.1080900@bull.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Laurent Vivier wrote: > Christian Borntraeger wrote: > >> Am Freitag, 10. August 2007 schrieb Laurent Vivier: >> >>> The aim of these two patches is to measure the CPU time used by a virtual >>> machine. All comments are welcome... I'm not sure it's the good way to do >>> >> that. >> >> I did something similar for or s390guest prototype, that Carsten posted in >> May. I decided to account guest time to the user process instead of adding a >> new field to avoid hazzle with old top. As you can read in the patch comment, >> I personally prefer a new field if we can get one. >> >> My implementation uses a similar mechanism like hard and softirq. So I have an >> sie_enter an sie_exit and a task_is_in_sie function - like irq_enter and >> irq_exit. The main difference is based on the fact, that s390 has precise >> accouting for irq, steal, user and system time, and therefore my patch is >> based on architecture specifc code using CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNT. >> >> In general my patch has the same idea as your patch, so I am going to review >> your patch and see if it would fit for s390. >> >> For reference this is the (never posted) old patch for our virtualisation >> prototype. It wont work with kvm but it gives you the idea what we had in >> mind on s390. >> >> > > thank you for your comment. > > As virtualization becomes very popular, perhaps we should implement something > which could be used by all linux supported architectures ? > (yes, I know it's non-sense for archs like m68k...) > But my [PATCH 1/2] can be a good start (adding "guest" in cpustat) > As guest accounting is hw dependent, I think we should add a hook in the > accounting functions. > Isn't PF_VM exactly such a hook? All the hypervisor needs to do is to set/unset it correctly? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function