[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48A3A806.8060509@goop.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:35:34 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@...g.org>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86 alternatives : fix LOCK_PREFIX race with preemptible
kernel and CPU hotplug
Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> A virtualized guest kernel could use that to limit its use of the
> overall machine CPU resources in different time periods. Policies can
> determine how many physical CPU a virtual machine can be tied to, and
> that may change depending on e.g. the workload or time of day. Having
> the ability to efficiently switch to UP for a long period of time seems
> important in this use-case.
Not very convinced. Unplugging cpus is a pretty coarse way to control
resource use. There are lots of other mechanisms. And it's not like an
uncontended lock is all that expensive these days...
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists