Re: [Bug] Take more 150s to boot qemu on ARM64

2022-06-13 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 08:26:34PM +0800, chenxiang (M) wrote: > Hi all, > > I encounter a issue with kernel 5.19-rc1 on a ARM64 board: it takes about > 150s between beginning to run qemu command and beginng to boot Linux kernel > ("EFI stub: Booting Linux Kernel..."). > > But in kernel 5.18-rc4

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 09/12] ring: introduce lockless ring buffer

2018-07-03 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 11:55:08AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > > > On 06/28/2018 07:55 PM, Wei Wang wrote: > >On 06/28/2018 06:02 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > >> > >>CC: Paul, Peter Zijlstra, Stefani, Lai who are all good at memory barrier. > >> > >> > >>On 06/20/2018 12:52 PM, Peter Xu wrote:

Re: [Qemu-devel] Java volatile vs. C11 seq_cst (was Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] add a header file for atomic operations)

2013-06-20 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 09:11:36AM +0200, Torvald Riegel wrote: > On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 18:53 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 05:37:42PM +0200, Torvald Riegel wrote: > > > On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 07:50 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > &g

Re: [Qemu-devel] Java volatile vs. C11 seq_cst (was Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] add a header file for atomic operations)

2013-06-18 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 06:38:38PM +0200, Torvald Riegel wrote: > On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 18:08 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Il 18/06/2013 16:50, Paul E. McKenney ha scritto: > > > PS: Nevertheless, I personally prefer the C++ formulation, but that is > > > on

Re: [Qemu-devel] Java volatile vs. C11 seq_cst (was Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] add a header file for atomic operations)

2013-06-18 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 05:37:42PM +0200, Torvald Riegel wrote: > On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 07:50 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > First, I am not a fan of SC, mostly because there don't seem to be many > > (any?) production-quality algorithms that need SC. But if you reall

Re: [Qemu-devel] Java volatile vs. C11 seq_cst (was Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] add a header file for atomic operations)

2013-06-18 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 03:24:24PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 17/06/2013 20:57, Richard Henderson ha scritto: > >> + * And for the few ia64 lovers that exist, an atomic_mb_read is a ld.acq, > >> + * while an atomic_mb_set is a st.rel followed by a memory barrier. > > ... > >> + */ > >> +#ifnd

Re: [Qemu-devel] [net-next RFC PATCH 4/7] tuntap: multiqueue support

2011-08-12 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 09:55:20AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > With the abstraction that each socket were a backend of a > queue for userspace, this patch adds multiqueue support for > tap device by allowing multiple sockets to be attached to a > tap device. Then we could parallize the transmission