Hey Waiman,

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:07:04PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 10/24/2017 11:37 AM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > Hello Peter,
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 10:13:45AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 05:44:27PM -0700, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> >>> @@ -46,6 +48,8 @@ static inline bool virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock 
> >>> *lock)
> >>>   if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
> >>>           return false;
> >>>  
> >>> + if (kvm_para_has_feature(KVM_FEATURE_PV_DEDICATED))
> >>> +         return false;
> >>>   /*
> >>>    * On hypervisors without PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS support we fall
> >>>    * back to a Test-and-Set spinlock, because fair locks have
> >> This does not apply. Much has been changed here recently.
> >>
> >  I checked against Linus master branch before sending. Which tree/branch 
> > are you referring to / should I based this?
> >
> Please check the tip tree
> (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git) which has
> the latest changes in locking code.

I will rebase the patch on top of the tip tree.

Thanks.

> 
> Cheers,
> Longman
> 

-- 
All the best,
Eduardo Valentin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to