On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 02:41:46PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 17:29 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > 
> > If we had a yield-to [1] sort of interface _and_ information on which vcpu
> > owns a lock, then lock-spinners can yield-to the owning vcpu, 
> 
> and then I'd nak it for being stupid ;-)
> 
> really, yield*() is retarded, never even consider using it. If you've
> got the actual owner you can do full blown PI, which is tons better than
> a 'do-something-random' call.

Yes definitely that would be much better than yield-to.

> The only reason the whole non-virt pause loop filtering muck uses it is
> because it really doesn't know anything, and do-something is pretty much
> all it can do. Its a broken interface.

- vatsa
--
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

Reply via email to