On 05/19/2016 04:56 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 19/05/2016 16:52, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>> Would this work too and be simpler? >> Hmm, your patch does only fiddle with the grow/shrink logic (which might >> be a good idea independently of this change), but the original patch >> actually takes into account that we have a guaranteed maximum time by a >> wakeup timer - IOW we know exactly what the maximum poll time is. >> > > Yes, it's different. The question is whether a 10us poll (40,000 clock > cycles) has an impact even if it's sometimes wrong.
Valid question. As I said, this change might be something good independent from the original patch. (it might make it unnecessary, though) On the other hand I can handle ~30 guest entry/exit cycles of a simple exit like diag9c. Needs measurement.
