On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Yoshiaki Tamura
tamura.yoshi...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
2010/12/17 Stefan Hajnoczi stefa...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Yoshiaki Tamura
tamura.yoshi...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
2010/12/16 Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at
On 12/14/2010 07:22 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
... fixed all the obvious stuff. No idea what the hell I was
thinking while doing that cleanup - probably too busy looking
at the tests that I was running on a previous codebase :(
For the next version of the patches, I have switched to your
Hi all!
I wanted to tell you that today I've upgraded to OpenBSD 4.8 and was not
necessary to use the mpbios hack, I think that until version 4.7 was
necessary. Also, I did a test to start the VM with two processors and
these were detected without problems.
A very good news, indeed!
Regards,
On 12/17/2010 09:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 17:09 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 12/17/2010 08:56 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Surely that makes it a reasonable idea to call yield, and
get one of the other tasks on the current CPU running for
a bit?
On 12/17/2010 09:15 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
BTW, with this vruntime donation thingy, what prevents a task from
forking off accomplices who do nothing but wait for a wakeup and
yield_to(exploit)?
What's the difference between that and forking off accomplices who
run(exploit) directly?
On Sat, 2010-12-18 at 19:02 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 12/17/2010 09:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 17:09 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 12/17/2010 08:56 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Surely that makes it a reasonable idea to call yield, and
get one of the
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 05:32:46PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 17 Dec 2010, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Am 17.12.2010 16:25, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Your aproach with disable_irq_nosync() is completely flawed, simply
because you try to pretend that your interrupt handler is done, while
On Sat, 2010-12-18 at 19:08 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 12/17/2010 09:15 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
BTW, with this vruntime donation thingy, what prevents a task from
forking off accomplices who do nothing but wait for a wakeup and
yield_to(exploit)?
What's the difference between that
Hi all!
Does system_powedown work with OpenBSD 4.8? When I run this command from
Qemu Monitor, the VM freezes using both bsd and bsd.mp stock kernel.
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Regards,
Daniel
--
Fingerprint: BFB3 08D6 B4D1 31B2 72B9 29CE 6696 BF1B 14E6 1D37
Powered by Debian
On Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:40:27 -0300,
Daniel Bareiro wrote:
Does system_powedown work with OpenBSD 4.8? When I run this command
from Qemu Monitor, the VM freezes using both bsd and bsd.mp stock
kernel.
I forgot to mention that the VMHost is Debian GNU/Linux Lenny with Linux
2.6.34.5
Hi all,
I would like to unbind some PCI devices at boot time to avoid shared IRQ
problems with PCI passthrough. One way of doing it is to simply write an
init.d script (done that before) which is quite simple.
But before I do this, is there another better 'linux' way to do this? In
this
On 12/18/2010 09:13 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sat, 2010-12-18 at 19:08 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 12/17/2010 09:15 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
BTW, with this vruntime donation thingy, what prevents a task from
forking off accomplices who do nothing but wait for a wakeup and
On 12/18/2010 09:06 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
I can see the problem, and I'm not trying to be Mr. Negative here, I'm
only trying to point out problems I see with what's been proposed.
If the yielding task had a concrete fee he could pay, that would be
fine, but he does not.
13 matches
Mail list logo
