On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 10:47:30AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
This series moves the icount state under the same seqlock as the normal
vm_clock implementation.
It is not yet 100% thread-safe, because the CPU list should be moved
under RCU protection (due to the call to
This series moves the icount state under the same seqlock as the normal
vm_clock implementation.
It is not yet 100% thread-safe, because the CPU list should be moved
under RCU protection (due to the call to !all_cpu_threads_idle()
in qemu_clock_warp). However it is a substantial step forward,
Am 08.10.2013 10:47, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
This series moves the icount state under the same seqlock as the normal
vm_clock implementation.
It is not yet 100% thread-safe, because the CPU list should be moved
under RCU protection (due to the call to !all_cpu_threads_idle()
in
Il 08/10/2013 15:47, Andreas Färber ha scritto:
Am 08.10.2013 10:47, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
This series moves the icount state under the same seqlock as the normal
vm_clock implementation.
It is not yet 100% thread-safe, because the CPU list should be moved
under RCU protection (due to the
