|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/3] kvm hypervisor : Add hypercalls to support p
|
To: |
vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/3] kvm hypervisor : Add hypercalls to support pv-ticketlock |
|
From: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:49:35 -0800 |
|
Cc: |
Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx>, kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Dumazet <dada1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, suzuki@xxxxxxxxxx, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx>, Linux Virtualization <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:50:13 -0800 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<20110120114246.GA11177@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<cover.1289940821.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <20110119164432.GA30669@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110119171239.GB726@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1295457672.28776.144.camel@laptop> <4D373340.60608@xxxxxxxx> <20110120114246.GA11177@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.7 |
On 01/20/2011 03:42 AM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:53:52AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>> The reason for wanting this should be clear I guess, it allows PI.
>> Well, if we can expand the spinlock to include an owner, then all this
>> becomes moot...
> How so? Having an owner will not eliminate the need for pv-ticketlocks
> afaict. We still need a mechanism to reduce latency in scheduling the next
> thread-in-waiting, which is achieved by your patches.
No, sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant that going to the effort
of not increasing the lock size to record "in slowpath" state.
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
Home