[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EA7E21B.8020805@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:34:03 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Raghavendra K T <raghukt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
Virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
x86@...nel.org, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
Xen <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Suzuki Poulose <suzuki@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V2 3/5] kvm hypervisor : Add two hypercalls to support
pv-ticketlock
On 10/25/2011 08:24 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>
> So then do also you foresee the need for directed yield at some point,
> to address LHP? provided we have good improvements to prove.
Doesn't this patchset completely eliminate lock holder preemption?
--
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