[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150209172818.GB1804@potion.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 18:28:19 +0100
From: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, riel@...hat.com,
mtosatti@...hat.com, jan.kiszka@...mens.com, dmatlack@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm: add halt_poll_ns module parameter
2015-02-09 17:10+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 09/02/2015 16:21, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> > 2015-02-06 13:48+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
> >> +TRACE_EVENT(kvm_vcpu_wakeup,
> >> + TP_PROTO(__u64 ns, bool waited),
> >
> > (__u64 is preferred here?)
>
> Preferred to what?
To 'u64'. (The header file shouldn't be reachable from user-space.)
> >> + } while (single_task_running() && ktime_before(cur, stop));
> >
> > After reading a bunch of code, I'm still not sure ...
> > - need_resched() can't be true when single_task_running()?
> > (I think it could happen -- balancing comes into mind.)
>
> Single_task_running is per-CPU; for a task to relinquish control to
> another task, you first need to have multiple tasks running. In other
> words, I think it cannot.
Ok, thanks. (I thought that need_resched has more general meaning and
couldn't confirm that balancing/CPU-offlining/... just evicts the task
without waiting for its schedule().)
--
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