[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130603152800.GA4224@phenom.dumpdata.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 11:28:00 -0400
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: gleb@...hat.com, mingo@...hat.com, jeremy@...p.org, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
peterz@...radead.org, mtosatti@...hat.com,
stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com, andi@...stfloor.org,
attilio.rao@...rix.com, ouyang@...pitt.edu, gregkh@...e.de,
agraf@...e.de, chegu_vinod@...com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
avi.kivity@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stephan.diestelhorst@....com,
riel@...hat.com, drjones@...hat.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V9 2/19] x86/ticketlock: Don't inline _spin_unlock
when using paravirt spinlocks
On Sun, Jun 02, 2013 at 12:52:09AM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> x86/ticketlock: Don't inline _spin_unlock when using paravirt spinlocks
>
> From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> The code size expands somewhat, and its better to just call
> a function rather than inline it.
>
> Thanks Jeremy for original version of ARCH_NOINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK config patch,
> which is simplified.
>
> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> index 685692c..80fcc4b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -621,6 +621,7 @@ config PARAVIRT_DEBUG
> config PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS
> bool "Paravirtualization layer for spinlocks"
> depends on PARAVIRT && SMP
> + select UNINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK
> ---help---
> Paravirtualized spinlocks allow a pvops backend to replace the
> spinlock implementation with something virtualization-friendly
>
--
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