On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 11:09:53AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/11/2017 19:43, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:24:16PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 02/11/2017 19:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 11:09:53AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/11/2017 19:43, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:24:16PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 02/11/2017 19:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
On 02/11/2017 19:43, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:24:16PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 02/11/2017 19:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> Currently, the
On 02/11/2017 19:43, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:24:16PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 02/11/2017 19:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> Currently, the
On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:24:16PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/11/2017 19:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> >>> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:24:16PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/11/2017 19:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> >>> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
Longman,
On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 02:12:13PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 11/02/2017 02:08 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> >>> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will
Longman,
On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 02:12:13PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 11/02/2017 02:08 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> >>> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will
On 02/11/2017 19:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
>>> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
>>> test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
>>>
On 02/11/2017 19:08, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
>>> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
>>> test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
>>>
On 11/02/2017 02:08 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
>>> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
>>> test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
On 11/02/2017 02:08 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
>>> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
>>> test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
> > test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
> >
> > This patch gives the opportunity to guest
On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 06:56:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
> > test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
> >
> > This patch gives the opportunity to guest
On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
> test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
>
> This patch gives the opportunity to guest kernels to select
> between test-and-set and the regular queueu fair lock
On 02/11/2017 18:45, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
> test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
>
> This patch gives the opportunity to guest kernels to select
> between test-and-set and the regular queueu fair lock
Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
This patch gives the opportunity to guest kernels to select
between test-and-set and the regular queueu fair lock implementation
based on the PV_DEDICATED KVM feature
Currently, the existing qspinlock implementation will fallback to
test-and-set if the hypervisor has not set the PV_UNHALT flag.
This patch gives the opportunity to guest kernels to select
between test-and-set and the regular queueu fair lock implementation
based on the PV_DEDICATED KVM feature
18 matches
Mail list logo