On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 08:13:14AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 08/15/13 03:30, Asias He wrote: > >On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 08:58:25PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >>On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 05:22:36PM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: > >>>On 08/14/13 13:37, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >>>>On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 09:02:32AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: > >>>>>If the TIF_NEED_RESCHED task flag is set, wake up any vhost_work_flush() > >>>>>waiters before rescheduling instead of after rescheduling. > >>>>> > >>>>>Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@xxxxxxx> > >>>>>Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>Cc: Asias He <asias@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> > >>>>Why exactly? It's not like flush needs to be extra fast ... > >>> > >>>I'm not worried about how fast a flush is processed either. But I > >>>think this patch is a nice cleanup of the vhost_worker() function. > >>>It eliminates the uninitialized_var() construct and moves the > >>>assignment of "done_seq" below the read of "queue_seq". > >>> > >>>Bart. > >> > >>I'm not worried about uninitialized_var - it's just a compiler bug. > >>done_seq below read is nice, but this is at the cost of sprinkling > >>lock/unlock, lock/unlock all over the code. Maybe we can come up with > >>something that doesn't have this property. > > > >The extra locking introduced here does not look good to me neither. > > Please note that although there are additional locking statements in > the code, there are no additional locking calls at runtime. > > Bart. That's true but this is supposed to be a cleanup. -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
