lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateMon, 07 Feb 2011 18:26:43 +0200
FromAvi Kivity <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Convert tsc_write_lock to raw_spinlock
On 02/07/2011 05:58 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-02-07 16:52, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 02/07/2011 05:38 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I don't know as it is allowed to sleep, it doesn't call any sleeping
> >>> functions to my knowledge. What worries me in the RT case is that the
> >>> spinlock acquired for hardware_enable might be preempted and run on
> >>> another CPU, which obviously isn't what you want.
> >>
> >> I see now, there are calls to raw_smp_processor_id.
> >>
> >> I think it's best to make this a raw lock. At this chance, some
> >> read-only users of vm_list should be rcu'ified. Will have a look.
> >
> > vm_list is rarely used, for either read or write. I don't see the need
> > to rcu it.
>
> Avoid that code under this lock expands the preempt-disabled period,
> specifically under -rt, and specifically as the number of objects over
> which we loop is user-defined.

Good point; even under non-rt.

(well, actually, cpufreq_notifier and kvm_arch_hardware_enable are
already non preemptible, and the stats code should just go away?)

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-02-07 17:29    [from the cache]
©2003-2010