Re: [PATCH v11 09/16] qspinlock, x86: Allow unfair spinlock in a virtual guest

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

 



On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 05:08:28PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> >Native performance is king, try your very utmost bestest to preserve
> >that, paravirt is a distant second and nobody sane should care about the
> >virt case at all.
> 
> The patch won't affect native performance unless the kernel is built with
> VIRT_UNFAIR_LOCKS selected. The same is also true when PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS is
> selected. There is no way around that.

VIRT_UNFAIR_LOCKS is an impossible switch to have; a distro cannot make
the right choice.

> I do agree that I may over-engineer on this patch,

Simple things first, then add complexity.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization




[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux