[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D0327E0.6070500@redhat.com>
Date:	Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:27:28 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
CC:	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] kvm: use yield_to instead of sleep in kvm_vcpu_on_spin
On 12/09/2010 07:07 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> Right. May be clearer by using a for () loop instead of the goto.
>
>
> And open coding kvm_for_each_vcpu ?
>
> Somehow I suspect that won't add to clarity...
No, I meant having a for (pass = 0; pass < 2; ++pass) and nesting 
kvm_for_each_vcpu() in it.
-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
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
 
