From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761578Ab2DLAa6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:30:58 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22532 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761562Ab2DLAax (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:30:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:26:46 -0300 From: Marcelo Tosatti To: Raghavendra K T Cc: Ingo Molnar , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Alexander Graf , Gleb Natapov , "H. Peter Anvin" , X86 , Avi Kivity , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Stefano Stabellini , Randy Dunlap , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, LKML , KVM , Virtualization , Xen , Sasha Levin , Srivatsa Vaddagiri Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V5 0/6] kvm : Paravirt-spinlock support for KVM guests Message-ID: <20120412002646.GC32051@amt.cnet> References: <20120323080503.14568.43092.sendpatchset@codeblue> <4F73593D.5020305@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F73593D.5020305@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:02:29AM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote: > On 03/23/2012 01:35 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote: > >The 6-patch series to follow this email extends KVM-hypervisor and Linux guest > >running on KVM-hypervisor to support pv-ticket spinlocks, based on Xen's > >implementation. > > > >One hypercall is introduced in KVM hypervisor,that allows a vcpu to kick > >another vcpu out of halt state. > >The blocking of vcpu is done using halt() in (lock_spinning) slowpath. > >one MSR is added to aid live migration. > > > >Changes in V5: > >- rebased to 3.3-rc6 > >- added PV_UNHALT_MSR that would help in live migration (Avi) > >- removed PV_LOCK_KICK vcpu request and pv_unhalt flag (re)added. > > Sorry for pinging > I know it is busy time. But I hope to get response on these patches > in your free time, so that I can target next merge window for this. > (whether it has reached some good state or it is heading in reverse > direction!). it would really boost my morale. > especially MSR stuff and dropping vcpu request bit for PV unhalt. > > - Raghu Looks good. Only the MSR appears an abuse, since there is no need to expose the info to the guest. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V5 0/6] kvm : Paravirt-spinlock support for KVM guests Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:26:46 -0300 Message-ID: <20120412002646.GC32051@amt.cnet> References: <20120323080503.14568.43092.sendpatchset@codeblue> <4F73593D.5020305@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Greg Kroah-Hartman , KVM , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , X86 , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Ingo Molnar , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , Avi Kivity , "H. Peter Anvin" , Virtualization , Xen , Stefano Stabellini , Sasha Levin To: Raghavendra K T Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F73593D.5020305@linux.vnet.ibm.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:02:29AM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote: > On 03/23/2012 01:35 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote: > >The 6-patch series to follow this email extends KVM-hypervisor and Linux guest > >running on KVM-hypervisor to support pv-ticket spinlocks, based on Xen's > >implementation. > > > >One hypercall is introduced in KVM hypervisor,that allows a vcpu to kick > >another vcpu out of halt state. > >The blocking of vcpu is done using halt() in (lock_spinning) slowpath. > >one MSR is added to aid live migration. > > > >Changes in V5: > >- rebased to 3.3-rc6 > >- added PV_UNHALT_MSR that would help in live migration (Avi) > >- removed PV_LOCK_KICK vcpu request and pv_unhalt flag (re)added. > > Sorry for pinging > I know it is busy time. But I hope to get response on these patches > in your free time, so that I can target next merge window for this. > (whether it has reached some good state or it is heading in reverse > direction!). it would really boost my morale. > especially MSR stuff and dropping vcpu request bit for PV unhalt. > > - Raghu Looks good. Only the MSR appears an abuse, since there is no need to expose the info to the guest.