From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755629AbXGHN7W (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 09:59:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752974AbXGHN7N (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 09:59:13 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:43146 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752860AbXGHN7M (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 09:59:12 -0400 Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 15:59:05 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Avi Kivity Cc: kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, shaohua.li@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration Message-ID: <20070708135905.GA24991@elte.hu> References: <11838994974161-git-send-email-avi@qumranet.com> <20070708133539.GA12597@elte.hu> <4690E973.7000606@qumranet.com> <20070708134850.GB22911@elte.hu> <4690EC47.6060904@qumranet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4690EC47.6060904@qumranet.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -1.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Avi Kivity wrote: > >> Won't that increase task_struct (16 bytes on 64-bit) unnecessarily? > >> The function pointers are common to all virtual machines. > > > > well, this function pointer could then be reused by other virtual > > machines as well, couldnt it? > > I don't get this. If we add a couple of members to task_struct, it > can't be reused. The values will be the same across all tasks, but > the memory will be gone (including tasks which aren't virtual > machines). i mean, the function pointer is set by KVM, but it could be set to a different value by other hypervisors. but ... no strong feelings either way, your patch is certainly fine. Acked-by: Ingo Molnar Ingo