On 2017/6/22 22:23, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, root wrote:--- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c @@ -39,6 +39,10 @@ #include <asm/desc.h> #include <asm/prctl.h> +#ifdef CONFIG_HYPERVISOR_GUEST +unsigned long poll_threshold_ns; +#endif + /* * per-CPU TSS segments. Threads are completely 'soft' on Linux, * no more per-task TSS's. The TSS size is kept cacheline-aligned @@ -313,6 +317,23 @@ static inline void play_dead(void) } #endif +#ifdef CONFIG_HYPERVISOR_GUEST +void arch_cpu_idle_poll(void) +{ + ktime_t start, cur, stop; + + if (poll_threshold_ns) { + start = cur = ktime_get(); + stop = ktime_add_ns(ktime_get(), poll_threshold_ns); + do { + if (need_resched()) + break; + cur = ktime_get(); + } while (ktime_before(cur, stop)); + } +} +#endifAside of the whole approach being debatable, what's the reason to make this depend on CONFIG_HYPERVISOR_GUEST and to move it into x86. If that mechanism is worthwhile then it should go into the generic code and not into x86. There is absolutely nothing x86 specific in that patch. Also the CONFIG_HYPERVISOR_GUEST dependency is silly. Distro kernels ship with CONFIG_HYPERVISOR_GUEST=y so this also gets into affect on bare metal.
You are right. As Paolo suggested, i will integrate it with paravalization code.
Thanks, tglx
-- Yang Alibaba Cloud Computing -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
