On 03.03.23 17:20, Peter Xu wrote:
On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 10:10:12AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 02.03.23 22:50, Peter Xu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 04:11:56PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
I guess the main concern here would be overhead from gabbing/releasing the
BQL very often,
On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 10:10:12AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 02.03.23 22:50, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 04:11:56PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > I guess the main concern here would be overhead from gabbing/releasing the
> > > BQL very often, and blocking the BQL
On 02.03.23 22:50, Peter Xu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 04:11:56PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
I guess the main concern here would be overhead from gabbing/releasing the
BQL very often, and blocking the BQL while we're eventually in the kernel,
clearing bitmaps, correct?
More or less ye
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 04:11:56PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> I guess the main concern here would be overhead from gabbing/releasing the
> BQL very often, and blocking the BQL while we're eventually in the kernel,
> clearing bitmaps, correct?
More or less yes. I think it's pretty clear we
On 02.03.23 15:45, Peter Xu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 10:46:56AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 25.02.23 17:31, Peter Xu wrote:
[not for merging, but for discussion; this is something I found when
looking at another issue on Chuang's optimization for migration downtime]
Summary: we
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 09:45:35AM -0500, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 10:46:56AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 25.02.23 17:31, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > [not for merging, but for discussion; this is something I found when
> > > looking at another issue on Chuang's optimization
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 10:46:56AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 25.02.23 17:31, Peter Xu wrote:
> > [not for merging, but for discussion; this is something I found when
> > looking at another issue on Chuang's optimization for migration downtime]
> >
> > Summary: we tried to access memor
On 25.02.23 17:31, Peter Xu wrote:
[not for merging, but for discussion; this is something I found when
looking at another issue on Chuang's optimization for migration downtime]
Summary: we tried to access memory_listeners, address_spaces, etc. in RCU
way. However we didn't implement them wit
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 07:09:57PM -0500, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 11:31:37AM -0500, Peter Xu wrote:
> > [not for merging, but for discussion; this is something I found when
> > looking at another issue on Chuang's optimization for migration downtime]
> >
> > Summary: we t
On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 11:31:37AM -0500, Peter Xu wrote:
> [not for merging, but for discussion; this is something I found when
> looking at another issue on Chuang's optimization for migration downtime]
>
> Summary: we tried to access memory_listeners, address_spaces, etc. in RCU
> way. Howeve
[not for merging, but for discussion; this is something I found when
looking at another issue on Chuang's optimization for migration downtime]
Summary: we tried to access memory_listeners, address_spaces, etc. in RCU
way. However we didn't implement them with RCU-safety. This patchset is
trying
11 matches
Mail list logo
