[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140822044503.GB4807@kernel>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 12:45:03 +0800
From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...ux.intel.com>
To: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
Raghavendra KT <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vinod Chegu <chegu_vinod@...com>,
Hui-Zhi Zhao <hui-zhi.zhao@...com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Lisa Mitchell <lisa.mitchell@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] Dynamic Pause Loop Exiting window.
Hi Radim,
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 06:50:03PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>2014-08-21 18:30+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
>> Il 21/08/2014 18:08, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
>> I'm not sure of the usefulness of patch 6, so I'm going to drop it.
>> I'll keep it in my local junkyard branch in case it's going to be useful
>> in some scenario I didn't think of.
>
>I've been using it to benchmark different values, because it is more
Is there any benchmark data for this patchset?
Regards,
Wanpeng Li
>convenient than reloading the module after shutting down guests.
>(And easier to sell than writing to kernel memory.)
>
>I don't think the additional code is worth it though.
>
>> Patch 7 can be easily rebased, so no need to repost (and I might even
>> squash it into patch 3, what do you think?).
>
>Yeah, the core is already a huge patch, so it does look weird without
>squashing. (No-one wants to rebase to that point anyway.)
>
>Thanks.
>--
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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