On 04/08/2011 08:42 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 08.04.11 at 17:25, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 04/07/2011 11:38 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>> Is there any downside to this patch (is X86_CMPXCHG in the same sort of >>> boat?) >> Only if we don't use cmpxchg in shared memory with other domains or the >> hypervisor. (I don't think it will dynamically switch between real and >> emulated cmpxchg depending on availability.) > Actually it does - see the "#ifndef CONFIG_X86_CMPXCHG" section > in asm/cmpxchg_32.h. Hm, OK. Still, I'm happiest with that dependency in case someone knobbles the cpu to exclude cmpxchg and breaks things. J _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization