[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87d1eqqlkv.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:25:36 +0100
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"x86\@kernel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"KY Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devel\@linuxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
"virtualization\@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/vdso: Add VCLOCK_HVCLOCK vDSO clock read method
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com> writes:
> Why not use existing seqlock's?
>
To be honest I don't quite understand how we could use it -- the
sequence locking here is done against the page updated by the
hypersior, we're not creating new structures (so I don't understand how
we could use struct seqcount which we don't have) but I may be
misunderstanding something.
BTW, I just occured to me that I should've probably put the TSC reading
code to mshyperv.h and use it from both vDSO and read_hv_clock_tsc() --
what do you thing?
[snip]
--
Vitaly
Powered by blists - more mailing lists