On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 01:12:11PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > In fact you shouldn't have just tested the patch on a case _without_ > preemption notifiers, you should have also benchmarked the impact that > static keys have _with_ preemption notifiers. In a > not-really-artificial case (one single-processor guest running on the > host), the static key patch adds a static_key_slow_inc on a relatively > hot path for KVM, which is not acceptable.
Spawning the first vcpu is a hot path? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
