Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 01:02:08 +0530
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, "linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, George Spelvin <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Daniel J Blueman <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexander Fyodorov <halcy@xxxxxxxxx>, Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@xxxxxx>, Scott J Norton <scott.norton@xxxxxx>, Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke <thavatchai.makpahibulchoke@xxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <5306413F.3010106@hp.com>
List-id: <linux-arch.vger.kernel.org>
Organization: IBM
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7

On 02/20/2014 11:24 PM, Waiman Long wrote:

Now the key is how to detect if a kernel is really running in a PV
environment. I need to ask some virtualization experts on that.


For kvm you could just follow,
kvm_spinlock_init_jump() and KVM_FEATURE_* encoding in cpuid
part __do_cpuid_ent().

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Waiman Long

References:
- [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Waiman Long
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: H. Peter Anvin
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Waiman Long
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Waiman Long
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Waiman Long
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
  - From: Waiman Long

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
Next by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Kernel] [Kernel Newbies] [x86 Platform Driver] [Netdev] [Linux Wireless] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Linux Filesystems] [Yosemite Discussion] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Samba] [Device Mapper]