On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 10:22:06AM -0500, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
> Hi Christoffer,
>
> This is change may not provide the measurable performance
> improvement, but still we can
> save a few cpu cycles on vCPU context switch and also improves the
> code readability.
I'm not so convinced about s
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 08:15:36PM -0500, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
> We are doing an unnecessary stack push/pop operation when restoring
> the guest registers x0-x18 in __guest_enter(). This patch saves the
> two instructions by using x18 as a base register. No need to store
> the vcpu context poi
Hi Christoffer,
This is change may not provide the measurable performance improvement,
but still we can
save a few cpu cycles on vCPU context switch and also improves the code
readability.
On 08/25/2016 08:31 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
Hi Shanker,
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 08:15:36PM -0500,
Hi Shanker,
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 08:15:36PM -0500, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
> We are doing an unnecessary stack push/pop operation when restoring
> the guest registers x0-x18 in __guest_enter(). This patch saves the
> two instructions by using x18 as a base register. No need to store
> the vcp
We are doing an unnecessary stack push/pop operation when restoring
the guest registers x0-x18 in __guest_enter(). This patch saves the
two instructions by using x18 as a base register. No need to store
the vcpu context pointer in stack because it is redundant and not
being used anywhere, the same
5 matches
Mail list logo
