On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:31:06AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > I think you're probably right; when I last tested this code, it was > hanging in at about the rate this kind of race would cause. And in my > previous analysis of similar schemes (the current pv spinlock code), it > was always correct to do the "slowpath" test after doing do the unlock. > > *But* I haven't yet had the chance to specifically go through and > analyse your patch in detail to make sure there's nothing else going on, > so take this as provisional. > > How much testing have you given it? 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 booting/shutting-down successfully (it would hang mid-way). - vatsa _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
