On 19.01.11 at 19:55, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote:
On 01/19/2011 10:39 AM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
I have tested quite extensively with booting a 16-vcpu guest (on a 16-pcpu
host)
and running kernel compine (with 32-threads). Without this patch, I had
difficulty
The following changes since commit 8a335bc631ac9c43675821580c26ebf95a3044ba:
Merge branch 'for-linus' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6
(2011-01-16 15:06:43 -0800)
are available in the git repository at:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:53:52AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
The reason for wanting this should be clear I guess, it allows PI.
Well, if we can expand the spinlock to include an owner, then all this
becomes moot...
How so? Having an owner will not eliminate the need for
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:53:52AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
I didn't really read the patch, and I totally forgot everything from
when I looked at the Xen series, but does the Xen/KVM hypercall
interface for this include the vcpu to await the kick from?
My guess is not, since the
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 17:29 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
If we had a yield-to [1] sort of interface _and_ information on which vcpu
owns a lock, then lock-spinners can yield-to the owning vcpu,
and then I'd nak it for being stupid ;-)
really, yield*() is retarded, never even consider
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 02:41:46PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 17:29 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
If we had a yield-to [1] sort of interface _and_ information on which vcpu
owns a lock, then lock-spinners can yield-to the owning vcpu,
and then I'd nak it for
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 04:58:13PM +0100, Torben Hohn wrote:
the -rt patches change the console_semaphore to console_mutex.
so a quite large chunk of the patches changes all
acquire/release_console_sem() to acquire/release_console_mutex()
Why not just change the functionality of the existing
On 01/20/2011 03:42 AM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:53:52AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
The reason for wanting this should be clear I guess, it allows PI.
Well, if we can expand the spinlock to include an owner, then all this
becomes moot...
How so? Having an
On 01/20/2011 03:59 AM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
At least in the Xen code, a current owner isn't very useful, because we
need the current owner to kick the *next* owner to life at release time,
which we can't do without some structure recording which ticket belongs
to which cpu.
If we had a
So it won't be all that simple to implement well, and before we try,
I'd like to know whether there are applications that are helped
by it. For example, we could try to measure latency at various
pps and see whether the backpressure helps. netperf has -b, -w
flags which might help these
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:41:22AM -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
PS - the enhanced latency statistics from -j are only available in
the omni version of the TCP_RR test. To get that add a
--enable-omni to the ./configure - and in this case both netperf and
netserver have to
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 08:34:48AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 04:58:13PM +0100, Torben Hohn wrote:
the -rt patches change the console_semaphore to console_mutex.
so a quite large chunk of the patches changes all
acquire/release_console_sem() to
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:55:02 +0100
torbenh torb...@gmx.de wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 08:34:48AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 04:58:13PM +0100, Torben Hohn wrote:
the -rt patches change the console_semaphore to console_mutex.
so a quite large chunk of the patches
[ Trimmed Eric from CC list as vger was complaining that it is too long ]
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:41:22AM -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
So it won't be all that simple to implement well, and before we try,
I'd like to know whether there are applications that are helped
by it. For example, we
Simon Horman wrote:
[ Trimmed Eric from CC list as vger was complaining that it is too long ]
...
I have constructed a test where I run an un-paced UDP_STREAM test in
one guest and a paced omni rr test in another guest at the same time.
Breifly I get the following results from the omni test..
15 matches
Mail list logo