From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755043Ab1GNN0r (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:26:47 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5112 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754917Ab1GNN0p (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:26:45 -0400 Message-ID: <4E1EEE8F.2050409@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:26:39 +0300 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110428 Fedora/3.1.10-1.fc15 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joerg Roedel CC: Joerg Roedel , Marcelo Tosatti , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] KVM: SVM: Use seperate VMCB for L2 guests References: <1310571145-28930-1-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <1310571145-28930-5-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <4E1ED53F.7030903@redhat.com> <20110714131228.GD24072@8bytes.org> In-Reply-To: <20110714131228.GD24072@8bytes.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/14/2011 04:12 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: > Makes sense. I'll probably remove the lazy allocation and initialize > both VMCBs at vcpu-creation time. The memory foodprint is the same as > before because the hsave area was also allocated at the beginning. Related, would we need a pool of n_vmcbs/vmcb02s? I guess the condition for reusing an n_vmcb would be: same vmcb_gpa and at least one clean bit set? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function