linux-kernel - Re: [RFC -v4 PATCH 3/3] kvm: use yield_to instead of sleep in kvm_vcpu_on

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:10:20 -0500
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...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>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -v4 PATCH 3/3] kvm: use yield_to instead of sleep in kvm_vcpu_on_spin

On 01/13/2011 10:23 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 01/13/2011 05:06 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>
>>> I think the first patch needs some reference counting... I'd move it to
>>> the outermost KVM_RUN loop to reduce the performance impact.
>>
>> I don't see how refcounting from that other thread could
>> possibly help, and I now see that the task_struct_cachep
>> does not have SLAB_DESTROY_BY_LRU, either :(
>>
>> What do you have in mind here that would both work and
>> be acceptable to you as KVM maintainer?
>>
>
> I think a 'struct pid' fits the bill here.

Indeed it does.   New patches on the way later, after I have
tested them some more.

-- 
All rights reversed
--
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/