[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC V8 0/17] Paravirtualized ticket spinlocks
- To: Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 19:25:27 +0200
- Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, KVM <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxx>, X86 <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Virtualization <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx>, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Attilio Rao <attilio.rao@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephan Diestelhorst <stephan.diestelhorst@xxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Tue, 15 May 2012 11:14:04 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
* Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > PS: Nikunj had experimented that pv-flush tlb +
> > paravirt-spinlock is a win on PLE where only one of them
> > alone could not prove the benefit.
>
> I'd like to see those numbers, then.
>
> Ingo, please hold on the kvm-specific patches, meanwhile.
I'll hold off on the whole thing - frankly, we don't want this
kind of Xen-only complexity. If KVM can make use of PLE then Xen
ought to be able to do it as well.
If both Xen and KVM makes good use of it then that's a different
matter.
Thanks,
Ingo
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
