Messages in this thread | | | From | "Alexander van Heukelum" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes | Date | Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:58:59 +0100 |
| |
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 17:54:09 +0100, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu> said: > > * Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@fastmail.fm> wrote: > > > > My estimation is that if we do it right, your approach will behave > > > better on modern CPUs (which is what matters most for such > > > things), especially on real workloads where there's a considerable > > > instruction-cache pressure. But it should be measured in any case. > > > > Fully agreed. I will do some measurements in the near future, maybe > > next week. At least noone came up with an absolutely blocking > > problem with this approach ;). > > how about "it does not build with lguest enabled" as a blocking > problem? ;-)
Blocking for applying the patch as is, sure... As a proof of concept it is still fine ;).
> arch/x86/lguest/built-in.o: In function `lguest_init_IRQ': > boot.c:(.init.text+0x33f): undefined reference to `interrupt'
It just needs to be fixed. I guess similar problems are to be expected with xen or um.
Thanks, Alexander
> config attached. > > Ingo -- Alexander van Heukelum heukelum@fastmail.fm
-- http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail...
| |