On 11/02/2012 10:00 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >
> >> As I understand the series, as->lock == NULL means that we will never
> >> take any lock during dispatch as the caller is not yet ready for
> >> fine-grained locking. This prevents the problem - for PIO at least. But
> >> this series should break
On 2012-11-02 01:52, liu ping fan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:44 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-11-01 16:45, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 10/29/2012 11:46 AM, liu ping fan wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 01:48 AM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>> F
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:44 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-11-01 16:45, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 11:46 AM, liu ping fan wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 10/29/2012 01:48 AM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
> For those address spaces which want to be able ou
On 2012-11-01 16:45, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 11:46 AM, liu ping fan wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 10/29/2012 01:48 AM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
For those address spaces which want to be able out of big lock, they
will be protected by their own l
On 10/29/2012 11:46 AM, liu ping fan wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 01:48 AM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>>> For those address spaces which want to be able out of big lock, they
>>> will be protected by their own local.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan
>>
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 01:48 AM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>> For those address spaces which want to be able out of big lock, they
>> will be protected by their own local.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan
>> ---
>> memory.c | 11 ++-
>> memory.h |
On 10/29/2012 01:48 AM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
> For those address spaces which want to be able out of big lock, they
> will be protected by their own local.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan
> ---
> memory.c | 11 ++-
> memory.h |5 -
> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletion
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 28 October 2012 23:48, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>> For those address spaces which want to be able out of big lock, they
>> will be protected by their own local.
>
> Are you sure this patch compiles? It seems to only be changing
> the prototype
On 28 October 2012 23:48, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
> For those address spaces which want to be able out of big lock, they
> will be protected by their own local.
Are you sure this patch compiles? It seems to only be changing
the prototype and implementation of address_space_init() to take
an extra par
For those address spaces which want to be able out of big lock, they
will be protected by their own local.
Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan
---
memory.c | 11 ++-
memory.h |5 -
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/memory.c b/memory.c
index 2f68d67..ff34ae
10 matches
Mail list logo
