Hey Waiman, On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:07:04PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 10/24/2017 11:37 AM, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > > Hello Peter, > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 10:13:45AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 05:44:27PM -0700, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > >>> @@ -46,6 +48,8 @@ static inline bool virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock) > >>> if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)) > >>> return false; > >>> > >>> + if (kvm_para_has_feature(KVM_FEATURE_PV_DEDICATED)) > >>> + return false; > >>> /* > >>> * On hypervisors without PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS support we fall > >>> * back to a Test-and-Set spinlock, because fair locks have > >> This does not apply. Much has been changed here recently. > >> > > I checked against Linus master branch before sending. Which tree/branch are you referring to / should I based this? > > > Please check the tip tree > (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git) which has > the latest changes in locking code. I will rebase the patch on top of the tip tree. Thanks. > > Cheers, > Longman > -- All the best, Eduardo Valentin -- 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
