Re: [PATCH RFC V2 3/5] kvm hypervisor : Add two hypercalls to supportpv-ticketlock

[Raghavendra K T]

On 10/26/2011 04:04 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/25/2011 08:24 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
CCing Ryan also
> > So then do also you foresee the need for directed yield at some point,
> > to address LHP? provided we have good improvements to prove.
>
> Doesn't this patchset completely eliminate lock holder preemption?
Basically I was curious whether we can do more better with your directed 
yield discussions in https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/8/2/106 .

I felt we can get little more improvement with doing directed yield to
lock-holder in case of LHP than sleeping. But I may be wrong.

So wanted to get the feedback, on whether I am thinking in right
direction.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/