[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC v5 7/8] pvqspinlock, x86: Add qspinlock para-virtualization support
- To: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@xxxxxx>
- From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:11:59 +0000
- Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alok Kataria <akataria@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Scott J Norton <scott.norton@xxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexander Fyodorov <halcy@xxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, Daniel J Blueman <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, George Spelvin <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@xxxxxx>, Chegu Vinod <chegu_vinod@xxxxxx>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:12:10 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On 26/02/14 15:14, Waiman Long wrote:
> This patch adds para-virtualization support to the queue spinlock code
> by enabling the queue head to kick the lock holder CPU, if known,
> in when the lock isn't released for a certain amount of time. It
> also enables the mutual monitoring of the queue head CPU and the
> following node CPU in the queue to make sure that their CPUs will
> stay scheduled in.
I'm not really understanding how this is supposed to work. There
appears to be an assumption that a guest can keep one of its VCPUs
running by repeatedly kicking it? This is not possible under Xen and I
doubt it's possible under KVM or any other hypervisor.
David
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
