[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140615131416.GI11371@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 15:14:16 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@...il.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
Chegu Vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 09/16] qspinlock, x86: Allow unfair spinlock in a
virtual guest
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 05:08:28PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> >Native performance is king, try your very utmost bestest to preserve
> >that, paravirt is a distant second and nobody sane should care about the
> >virt case at all.
>
> The patch won't affect native performance unless the kernel is built with
> VIRT_UNFAIR_LOCKS selected. The same is also true when PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS is
> selected. There is no way around that.
VIRT_UNFAIR_LOCKS is an impossible switch to have; a distro cannot make
the right choice.
> I do agree that I may over-engineer on this patch,
Simple things first, then add complexity.
--
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