Christian Borntraeger wrote:
Why can't this be done from the timer context (after adjusting the locks)?
It can be done, in fact I did that in my first version. The thing is, we would
need to change all local_int.locks to spinlock_irqs, since standard timers are
softirqs and hrtimers and hardirqs. Enabling and disabling irqs is a relatively
expensive operating on s390 (but locks via compare and swap are quite cheap).
Since we take this specific lock in lots of places this lock is on some hot
pathes. The idle wakeup on the other hand is not that critical.
Makes sense.
Back when irqsave/irqrestore were expensive on x86 (P4 days, I think it
was ~100 cycles) there was talk of using a software irq disable flag
instead of using the hardware support. So
- local_irq_disable() sets a flag
- interrupt handlers check the flag, if set they schedule the interrupt
handler and return immediately
- local_irq_restore() clears the flag and fires and scheduled handlers
Now these operations are pretty cheap on x86, but maybe that can apply
to s390.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
