Re: [PATCH RFC V11 0/18] Paravirtualized ticket spinlocks
From: Raghavendra K T <hidden>
Date: 2013-08-06 02:44:16
Also in:
kvm, lkml, xen-devel
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2013-07-23 · Re: [PATCH RFC V11 0/18] Paravirtualized ticket spinlocks · Raghavendra K T <hidden>
- 2013-07-22 · Re: [PATCH RFC V11 0/18] Paravirtualized ticket spinlocks · Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <hidden>
- 2013-07-22 · [PATCH RFC V11 0/18] Paravirtualized ticket spinlocks · Raghavendra K T <hidden>
On 08/06/2013 04:20 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
So, having read through the entire thread I *think* this is what the
status of this patchset is:
1. Patches 1-17 are noncontroversial, Raghavendra is going to send an
update split into two patchsets;Yes. Only one patch would be common to both host and guest which will be sent as a separate patch. I 'll rebase first patchset to -next and second patchset to kvm tree as needed.
2. There are at least two versions of patch 15; I think the "PATCH
RESEND RFC" is the right one.True.
3. Patch 18 is controversial but there are performance numbers; these
should be integrated in the patch description.Current plan is to drop for patch 18 for now.