Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1182296
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/7] locking/qspinlock: A fairer queued unfair lock |
| Date | 2015-07-12 10:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <pLkO6-5ZO-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <pL9IZ-7CW-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pL9IZ-7CW-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 04:36:57PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > For a virtual guest with the qspinlock patch, a simple unfair byte lock > will be used if PV spinlock is not configured in or the hypervisor > isn't either KVM or Xen. Why do we care about this case enough to add over 300 lines of code? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 6/7] locking/qspinlock: A fairer queued unfair lock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-07-12 10:30 +0200 Re: [PATCH 6/7] locking/qspinlock: A fairer queued unfair lock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-07-14 22:50 +0200
csiph-web