[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALzav=erjRRJDhGUL6ZsJ2tTJc0VhsTWasiAt6UBm-98aZa==g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 09:07:39 -0700
From: David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] KVM: dynamic halt_poll_ns adjustment
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 2:23 AM, Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com> wrote:
>
> How about something like:
>
> @@ -1941,10 +1976,14 @@ void kvm_vcpu_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> */
> if (kvm_vcpu_check_block(vcpu) < 0) {
> ++vcpu->stat.halt_successful_poll;
> - goto out;
> + break;
> }
> cur = ktime_get();
> } while (single_task_running() && ktime_before(cur, stop));
> +
> + poll_ns = ktime_to_ns(cur) - ktime_to_ns(start);
> + if (ktime_before(cur, stop) && single_task_running())
> + goto out;
I would prefer an explicit signal (e.g. set a bool to true before breaking out
of the loop, and check it here) to avoid duplicating the loop exit condition.
--
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