[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D501698.1000507@siemens.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 16:58:16 +0100
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC: Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Convert tsc_write_lock to raw_spinlock
On 2011-02-07 16:52, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/07/2011 05:38 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't know as it is allowed to sleep, it doesn't call any sleeping
>>> functions to my knowledge. What worries me in the RT case is that the
>>> spinlock acquired for hardware_enable might be preempted and run on
>>> another CPU, which obviously isn't what you want.
>>
>> I see now, there are calls to raw_smp_processor_id.
>>
>> I think it's best to make this a raw lock. At this chance, some
>> read-only users of vm_list should be rcu'ified. Will have a look.
>
> vm_list is rarely used, for either read or write. I don't see the need
> to rcu it.
Avoid that code under this lock expands the preempt-disabled period,
specifically under -rt, and specifically as the number of objects over
which we loop is user-defined.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
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