On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 11:02:55PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

quoted

There is the series from Audrey which makes use of the various idle
prediction mechanisms, scheduler, irq timings, idle governor to get an idea
about the estimated idle time. Exactly this information can be fed to the
kvmidle driver which can act accordingly.

Hacking a random hardware specific idle driver is definitely the wrong
approach. It might be useful to chain the kvmidle driver and hardware
specific drivers at some point, i.e. if the kvmdriver decides not to exit
it delegates the mwait decision to the proper hardware driver in order not
to reimplement all the required logic again.

By making changes to idle core to allow that chaining?
Does this sound like something reasonable?

At least for me it makes sense to avoid code duplication. But thats up to
the cpuidle maintainers to decide at the end.

Thanks,

	tglx