Re: [PATCH RFC V8 0/17] Paravirtualized ticket spinlocks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

* Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > PS: Nikunj had experimented that pv-flush tlb + 
> > paravirt-spinlock is a win on PLE where only one of them 
> > alone could not prove the benefit.
> I'd like to see those numbers, then.
> Ingo, please hold on the kvm-specific patches, meanwhile.

I'll hold off on the whole thing - frankly, we don't want this 
kind of Xen-only complexity. If KVM can make use of PLE then Xen 
ought to be able to do it as well.

If both Xen and KVM makes good use of it then that's a different 


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

[Site Home]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux