On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 17:39, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 18/07/19 11:29, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 17:07, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>
> >> On 18/07/19 10:43, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > Isnt that done by the sched_in handler?
>
> I am a bit confused because, if it is don
On 18/07/19 11:29, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 17:07, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>> On 18/07/19 10:43, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> Isnt that done by the sched_in handler?
I am a bit confused because, if it is done by the sched_in later, I
don't understand why the sched_out h
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 17:07, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 18/07/19 10:43, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>> Isnt that done by the sched_in handler?
> >>
> >> I am a bit confused because, if it is done by the sched_in later, I
> >> don't understand why the sched_out handler hasn't set vcpu->preempted
> >> al
On 18/07/19 10:43, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> Isnt that done by the sched_in handler?
>>
>> I am a bit confused because, if it is done by the sched_in later, I
>> don't understand why the sched_out handler hasn't set vcpu->preempted
>> already.
>>
>> The s390 commit message is not very clear, but it tal
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 16:34, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 18/07/19 10:15, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 18.07.19 09:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 12/07/19 09:15, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> >>> index b4ab59d..2c46705 100644
> >>
On 18/07/19 10:15, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 18.07.19 09:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 12/07/19 09:15, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>>> index b4ab59d..2c46705 100644
>>> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>>> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>>> @@ -24
On 18.07.19 09:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 12/07/19 09:15, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>> index b4ab59d..2c46705 100644
>> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>> @@ -2404,8 +2404,10 @@ void kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
On 12/07/19 09:15, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> index b4ab59d..2c46705 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -2404,8 +2404,10 @@ void kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> int me;
> int cpu = vcpu->cpu;
>
>
Cc arm guy's latest email
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 15:15, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>
> From: Wanpeng Li
>
> Inspired by commit 9cac38dd5d (KVM/s390: Set preempted flag during vcpu wakeup
> and interrupt delivery), except the lock holder, we want to also boost vCPUs
> that are delivering interrupts. Actual
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 15:15, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>
> From: Wanpeng Li
>
> Inspired by commit 9cac38dd5d (KVM/s390: Set preempted flag during vcpu wakeup
> and interrupt delivery), except the lock holder, we want to also boost vCPUs
> that are delivering interrupts. Actually most smp_call_function_
From: Wanpeng Li
Inspired by commit 9cac38dd5d (KVM/s390: Set preempted flag during vcpu wakeup
and interrupt delivery), except the lock holder, we want to also boost vCPUs
that are delivering interrupts. Actually most smp_call_function_many calls are
synchronous ipi calls, the ipi target vCPU
11 matches
Mail list logo
