From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45510) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dQM3Y-0000aY-Qs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 19:07:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dQM3U-0008DB-2j for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 19:07:32 -0400 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]:37363) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dQM3T-0008Cr-Sd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 19:07:28 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 19:07:25 -0400 From: "Emilio G. Cota" Message-ID: <20170628230725.GA9893@flamenco> References: <149855711979.4578.11884555663631849051.stgit@frigg.lan> <20170627175815.GA17639@flamenco> <878tkce4sm.fsf@frigg.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <878tkce4sm.fsf@frigg.lan> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v9 0/7] trace: [tcg] Optimize per-vCPU tracing states with separate TB caches List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , Eduardo Habkost On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 14:21:29 +0300, Lluís Vilanova wrote: > Emilio G Cota writes: > > I wanted to save you some time and sent a v9 yesterday with these > > same changes -- although I see some changes in my v8 didn't make it > > to your v9. For this iteration I only added more perf numbers to the > > last patch, see here: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-06/msg05764.html > > Woops, sorry about the duplicate effort. > > I just dropped the rename of variable trace_ds, since I prefer names whose > purpose can be more easily understood. - I think trace_vcpu_dstate is way too long (IMO a short name + a comment in the struct is better). - You missed a change I made to patch 3: > [cota: use CPU_TRACE_DSTATE_MAX_EVENTS instead of trace_get_vcpu_event_count()] Was that intentional? - Would be nice to include the perf numbers I got, along with yours. E.