Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] KVM: x86: guest exit microoptimization

2016-07-01 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 16/06/2016 10:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > This saves about 20 clock cycles per vmexit by avoiding a > local_irq_save/restore pair. The price is that nested VMX will break > with KVM hosts < 3.16, because the "acknowledge interrupt on exit" > feature becomes mandatory. What do you think? I'm

[RFC PATCH 0/2] KVM: x86: guest exit microoptimization

2016-06-16 Thread Paolo Bonzini
This saves about 20 clock cycles per vmexit by avoiding a local_irq_save/restore pair. The price is that nested VMX will break with KVM hosts < 3.16, because the "acknowledge interrupt on exit" feature becomes mandatory. What do you think? Paolo Paolo Bonzini (2): KVM: x86: always use "acknow