[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200911084613.GA562@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 17:46:13 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To: yezengruan <yezengruan@...wei.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>, joelaf@...gle.com,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
suleiman@...gle.com,
"kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"Wanghaibin (D)" <wanghaibin.wang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] arm64:kvm: teach guest sched that VCPUs can be
preempted
Hi,
On (20/08/17 20:03), yezengruan wrote:
> Hi Sergey,
>
> I have a set of patches similar to yours.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191226135833.1052-1-yezengruan@huawei.com/
I'm sorry for the belated reply.
Right, quite similar, but not exactly, I believe. I deliberately wanted
to untangle vcpu preemption (which is a characteristics feature) from
pv-lock, which may be somewhat implementation dependent.
Perhaps vcpu_is_preempted() should not even be implemented on per-arch
basis, but instead it can be more of a "core" functionality.
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists