[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <550BCFBC.9000106@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:13:56 +0530
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, paolo.bonzini@...il.com,
konrad.wilk@...cle.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, riel@...hat.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, david.vrabel@...rix.com,
oleg@...hat.com, scott.norton@...com, doug.hatch@...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,
luto@...capital.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] qspinlock,x86,kvm: Implement KVM support for paravirt
qspinlock
On 03/20/2015 02:38 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 03/19/2015 06:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[...]
> You are probably right. The initial apply_paravirt() was done before the
> SMP boot. Subsequent ones were at kernel module load time. I put a
> counter in the __native_queue_spin_unlock() and it registered 26949
> unlock calls in a 16-cpu guest before it got patched out.
because even printks take lock..
--
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