On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 20:55 +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 08:37:29PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Another possibility, would something like this work?
> >
> >
> > /*
> > * null out the begin functio
On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 09:11 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 8 May 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Also, we'd need to make it
> >
> > unsigned short flag:1;
> >
> > _and_ change spinlock_types.h to make the spinlock size actually match the
> > required size (right now we make
On Sat, 2008-04-05 at 02:41 +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 04:12:42PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > I think you can break this if() down a bit:
> >
> > if (!(vma->vm_file && vma->vm_file->f_mapping))
> > continue;
>
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 18:24 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Ok lets forget about the single theaded thing to solve the registration
> races. As Andrea pointed out this still has ssues with other subscribed
> subsystems (and also try_to_unmap). We could do something like what
> stop_machine_run
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 14:33 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> > but anyway it's silly to be hardwired to such an interface that worst
> > of all requires switch statements instead of proper pointer to
> > functions and a fixed set of parameters and r
FWIW, I'll cut the kvm and openfabrics lists from any future posts.
I'm getting tired of the bounces.
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/
On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 22:20 +0800, Zhao Forrest wrote:
> On 2/29/08, Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 16:55 +0800, Zhao Forrest wrote:
> > > Sorry for reposting it.
> > >
> > > For example,
> > > 1
On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 16:55 +0800, Zhao Forrest wrote:
> Sorry for reposting it.
>
> For example,
> 1 rdtsc() is invoked on CPU0
> 2 process is migrated to CPU1, and rdtsc() is invoked on CPU1
> 3 if TSC on CPU1 is slower than TSC on CPU0, can kernel guarantee
> that the second rdtsc() doesn't re
