[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878vep4558.fsf@abhimanyu.in.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:28:59 +0530
From: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
S390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>,
"Andrew M. Theurer" <habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 <x86@...nel.org>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, linux390@...ibm.com,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] kvm vcpu: Note down pause loop exit
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:22:29 +0530, Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 07/11/2012 02:23 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >
> > This adds some tiny overhead to vcpu entry. You could remove it by
> > using the vcpu->requests mechanism to clear the flag, since
> > vcpu->requests is already checked on every entry.
>
> So IIUC, let's have request bit for indicating PLE,
>
> pause_interception() /handle_pause()
> {
> make_request(PLE_REQUEST)
> vcpu_on_spin()
>
> }
>
> check_eligibility()
> {
> !test_request(PLE_REQUEST) || ( test_request(PLE_REQUEST) &&
> dy_eligible())
> .
> .
> }
>
> vcpu_run()
> {
>
> check_request(PLE_REQUEST)
>
I know check_request will clear PLE_REQUEST, but you just need a
clear_request here, right?
--
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