[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLU436-SMTP705A5D4244725484F3E18780570@phx.gbl>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 08:15:50 +0800
From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>
To: David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.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 9/4/15 12:07 AM, David Matlack wrote:
> 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.
Fix it in v7, thanks for your review, David! ;-)
Regards,
Wanpeng Li
--
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