On 03/30/2015 12:29 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:25:12PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
I did it differently in my PV portion of the qspinlock patch. Instead of
just waking up the CPU, the new lock holder will check if the new queue head
has been halted. If so, it will set
On 03/27/2015 10:07 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 09:21:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 03:47:39PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Ah nice. That could be spun out as a seperate patch to optimize the existing
ticket locks I presume.
Yes
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:25:12PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> I did it differently in my PV portion of the qspinlock patch. Instead of
> just waking up the CPU, the new lock holder will check if the new queue head
> has been halted. If so, it will set the slowpath flag for the halted queue
> head
On 03/25/2015 03:47 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 02:16:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change
On 03/25/2015 03:47 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 02:16:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change
On 03/30/2015 12:29 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:25:12PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
I did it differently in my PV portion of the qspinlock patch. Instead of
just waking up the CPU, the new lock holder will check if the new queue head
has been halted. If so, it will set
On 03/27/2015 10:07 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 09:21:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 03:47:39PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Ah nice. That could be spun out as a seperate patch to optimize the existing
ticket locks I presume.
Yes
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:25:12PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
I did it differently in my PV portion of the qspinlock patch. Instead of
just waking up the CPU, the new lock holder will check if the new queue head
has been halted. If so, it will set the slowpath flag for the halted queue
head in
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 09:21:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 03:47:39PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > Ah nice. That could be spun out as a seperate patch to optimize the existing
> > ticket locks I presume.
>
> Yes I suppose we can do something similar for
On 03/16/2015 06:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
The paravirt stuff is
On 03/16/2015 06:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
The paravirt stuff is
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 09:21:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 03:47:39PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Ah nice. That could be spun out as a seperate patch to optimize the existing
ticket locks I presume.
Yes I suppose we can do something similar for the
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 03:47:39PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> Ah nice. That could be spun out as a seperate patch to optimize the existing
> ticket locks I presume.
Yes I suppose we can do something similar for the ticket and patch in
the right increment. We'd need to restructure the
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 03:47:39PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Ah nice. That could be spun out as a seperate patch to optimize the existing
ticket locks I presume.
Yes I suppose we can do something similar for the ticket and patch in
the right increment. We'd need to restructure the
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 02:16:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Hi Waiman,
>
> As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last
> week.
>
> All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
> change is the copyright lines in the first
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 02:16:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last
week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 06:01:34PM +, David Vrabel wrote:
> This seems work for me, but I've not got time to give it a more thorough
> testing.
>
> You can fold this into your series.
Thanks!
> There doesn't seem to be a way to disable QUEUE_SPINLOCKS when supported by
> the arch, is this
On 16/03/15 13:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> I feel that if someone were to do a Xen patch we can go ahead and merge this
> stuff (finally!).
This seems work for me, but I've not got time to give it a more thorough
testing.
You can fold this into your series.
There doesn't seem to be a way to
On 16/03/15 13:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I feel that if someone were to do a Xen patch we can go ahead and merge this
stuff (finally!).
This seems work for me, but I've not got time to give it a more thorough
testing.
You can fold this into your series.
There doesn't seem to be a way to
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 06:01:34PM +, David Vrabel wrote:
This seems work for me, but I've not got time to give it a more thorough
testing.
You can fold this into your series.
Thanks!
There doesn't seem to be a way to disable QUEUE_SPINLOCKS when supported by
the arch, is this
On 03/16/2015 09:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
The paravirt stuff is
On 03/16/2015 09:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
The paravirt stuff is
On 16/03/15 13:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Hi Waiman,
>
> As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last
> week.
>
> All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
> change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
>
> The paravirt
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
The paravirt stuff is 'simple' and KVM only -- the Xen code was a little
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
The paravirt stuff is 'simple' and KVM only -- the Xen code was a little
On 16/03/15 13:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Hi Waiman,
As promised; here is the paravirt stuff I did during the trip to BOS last
week.
All the !paravirt patches are more or less the same as before (the only real
change is the copyright lines in the first patch).
The paravirt stuff is
26 matches
Mail list logo
