From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] Sched clock paravirt op fix.patch Date: 13 Mar 2007 21:56:28 +0100 Message-ID: <20070313205628.GB46469@muc.de> References: <200703020254.l222sOaM009656@zach-dev.vmware.com> <20070313140129.GB92373@muc.de> <45F6C2A3.4040305@goop.org> <20070313160709.GH10574@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <20070313161656.GA12128@muc.de> <45F6D361.8080106@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 21:56:28 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45F6D361.8080106@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: Rik van Riel Cc: Chris Wright , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Daniel Walker , Virtualization Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 12:37:53PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > >On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 09:07:09AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > >>* Jeremy Fitzhardinge (jeremy@goop.org) wrote: > >>>In other words, regardless of whether this particular pv_op lives or > >>>dies, we're going to need to have to deal with stolen time properly. I > >>>think this hook is reasonable and useful step towards doing that. > >>Exactly. Normal interrupts we can handle. Having CPU completely > >>disappear for unkown time periods we can't, and will need to. > > > >But that is just what a interrupt is. > = > Interrupts tend to be reasonably short though. It depends -- under heavy network load you can spend a long time just processing interrupts. -Andi