Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpu: idle state framework for offline CPUs.

2009-08-16 Thread Dipankar Sarma
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:53:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 01:14 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: > > Agreed, I've tried to come with a little ASCII art to depict your > > scenairos graphically > > > > > > ++ don't need (offline) > > | OS+--

Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpu: idle state framework for offline CPUs.

2009-08-16 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 01:14 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: > * Dipankar Sarma [2009-08-16 23:56:29]: > > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 01:30:21PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > > > It depends on the hypervisor implementation. On pseries (powerpc) > > > > hypervisor, for example, they are differe

Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpu: idle state framework for offline CPUs.

2009-08-16 Thread Balbir Singh
* Dipankar Sarma [2009-08-16 23:56:29]: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 01:30:21PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > It depends on the hypervisor implementation. On pseries (powerpc) > > > hypervisor, for example, they are different. By offlining a vcpu > > > (and in turn shutting a cpu), you wil

Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpu: idle state framework for offline CPUs.

2009-08-16 Thread Dipankar Sarma
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 01:30:21PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > It depends on the hypervisor implementation. On pseries (powerpc) > > hypervisor, for example, they are different. By offlining a vcpu > > (and in turn shutting a cpu), you will actually create a configuration > > change in the