[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87eezw3lna.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2019 10:39:05 +0200
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: X86: Add "nopvspin" parameter to disable PV spinlocks
Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@...cle.com> writes:
> On 2019/9/30 23:41, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Zhenzhong Duan<zhenzhong.duan@...cle.com> writes:
>>
>>> There are cases where a guest tries to switch spinlocks to bare metal
>>> behavior (e.g. by setting "xen_nopvspin" on XEN platform and
>>> "hv_nopvspin" on HYPER_V).
>>>
>>> That feature is missed on KVM, add a new parameter "nopvspin" to disable
>>> PV spinlocks for KVM guest.
>>>
>>> This new parameter is also intended to replace "xen_nopvspin" and
>>> "hv_nopvspin" in the future.
>> Any reason to not do it right now? We will probably need to have compat
>> code to support xen_nopvspin/hv_nopvspin too but emit a 'is deprecated'
>> warning.
>
> Sorry the description isn't clear, I'll fix it.
>
> I did the compat work in the other two patches.
> [PATCH 2/3] xen: Mark "xen_nopvspin" parameter obsolete and map it to "nopvspin"
> [PATCH 3/3] x86/hyperv: Mark "hv_nopvspin" parameter obsolete and map it to "nopvspin"
>
For some reason I got CCed only on the first one and moreover, I don't
see e.g PATCH3 on 'linux-hyperv' mailing list.
>>
>>> The global variable pvspin isn't defined as __initdata as it's used at
>>> runtime by XEN guest.
>>>
>>> Refactor the print stuff with pr_* which is preferred.
>> Please do it in a separate patch.
>
> Ok, I'll do that in v2. Thanks for review.
Thanks!
--
Vitaly
Powered by blists - more mailing lists