[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A13C40B.8080608@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 11:49:15 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Mark Langsdorf <mark.langsdorf@....com>,
Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][KVM][retry 3] Add support for Pause Filtering to AMD
SVM
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> That said, I still thoroughly dislike this whole approach.
>>>
>>>
>> Can you explain why? We have a thread that has detected that it's
>> spinning. Keeping on spinning is a waste of cpu time. Why not let
>> something else use the cpu?
>>
>
> Because its a polling interface. I much prefer it if we were to get a
> wakeup notification when the vcpu holding the lock releases it.
>
It's a fully virtualized guest. There's no way to get this without
patching the guest kernel.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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